Review Summary: In order to avoid the confusion I would rather describe the solution as the pattern, rather than the anti-pattern. Therefore, i would leave the motivation untouched but I'd reword the aim. Instead of describing the common mistake and its possible correction, I would start describing the situation, i.e.: a universal value restriction on a property that has, in fact, as its range the union of two disjunct classes.
Reviewer Confidence: Good
Problems: I would add some natural language description of the problem example to the bare OWL code.
Relation to Best Practices:
Relations to Other Patterns:
Overall Understandability: Rewording the Aim section will avoid confusion between the anti-pattern and the proposed solution.
Commenting the problem example with more text in addition to the OWL could certainly improve the understandability of the pattern.
Clear Problem Description:
Clear Relevance and Consequences: Something more could be said in the motivation about the consequences that using the wrong solution (anti-pattern) could have in terms of consistency of the ontology and satisfiability of its classes
Clear Figures and Illustrations:
Posted: 2009/9/1 Last modified: 2009/9/1