|Something that I think is very important, for the "novice to w3c
practices" is some indication of which documents contains what, and the relation among them. This becomes clear while reading "Structural specification...", but it is not necessarily the case the one starts with it.
As I understood, the specs in the "Structural.." are relative to OWL2- DL (especially the restrictions on axioms at the end). While "OWL2- FULL" is "presented" in the "RDF Semantics" doc. And "Profiles" de- facto replace what was DL-Lite. If so, these facts should be made more explicit.
So, I think these docs are fine and the features introduced in OWL2 interesting (though much anticipated). Don't know exactly what "self" is for though... I would be curious to know. I guess some extra-doc is needed for a "non w3c" public to start working with OWL: the "Direct Smantic..." + some more general explanation would work well.
(longer text in [the original email])
To: Andrea Splendiani <Andrea.firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: [LC response] To Andrea Splendiani
Thank you for your comment
on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.
The Working Group acknowledges the need for some sort of an introductory text, combined with a roadmap covering the various OWL 2 documents. At its last face-to-face meeting the Working Group has, therefore, added a new document to the OWL 2 suite, entitled "Document Overview". The document has not yet been published, but an editor's draft is publicly available at:
We hope that this document will satisfy the requirement that you identified in your comment.
Please acknowledge receipt of this email to <mailto:email@example.com> (replying to this email should suffice). In your acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you are satisfied with the working group's response to your comment.
on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group
CUT AND PASTE THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE (I.E. FROM "Dear" TO "Group") INTO THE BODY OF AN EMAIL MESSAGE. SET THE To:, CC:, AND Subject: LINES ACCORDINGLY.
PLEASE TRY TO REPLY IN A WAY THAT WILL ALLOW THREADING TO WORK APPROPRIATELY, I.E., SO THAT YOUR REPLY CONTINUES THE THREAD STARTED BY THE ORIGINAL COMMENT EMAIL