- From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 00:10:35 +0200
- To: "Lassila Ora (NRC/Boston)" <ora.lassila@nokia.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org
Although not formally LC comments, the following points (made by Ora a long time ago) are still pertinent. I propose the following actions (reflected in the editor's draft) Lassila Ora (NRC/Boston) wrote: > 1) (forgive me if I have missed discussion on this before) Abstract, 1st > paragraph says "OWL facilitates greater machine readability of Web content > than..."; all web content is machine readable (at least it is difficult for > me to imagine *web* content that isn't :-). Some other word than > "readability" should be used, perhaps "interpretability", "processability" > [sp?], and/or maybe structure the sentence in some other way. First > paragraph of the Introduction also talks about "machine readable" content. I suggest "interpretability". > 2) Section 1.1, the first occurrence of "OWL" in the list is spelled "Owl". fixed. > 3) I do not understand what follows the first sentence of the second > paragraph of section 3. Typo. Fixed. > 4) Section 3.1, the description of Class has the name of the property > subClassOf capitalized, and the name only links to the overview document > itself (not to any appropriate subsection). Same applies to allValuesFrom > under the description of rdfs:range. Fixed. > 5) The intention of the sentence "Note that properties that are to be made > symmetric may not have arbitrary domains and ranges" in section 3.3 is not > clear (although this is better than what was there before). Perhaps it is > just too vague. I suggest to remove this phrase. > 6) The sentence "OWL Lite has contains an intersection constructor but > limits its usage" in section 3.6 does not parse. typo. fixed. Frank. ----
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2003 18:10:46 UTC