- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 09:02:19 -0600
- To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
- CC: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com wrote: [...] > You are right (perfect guess!), it's better to have those names. > I've updated the files, but currently I have some trouble to put them at > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfs-transitive-subSubProperty/ > (and I asked Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> for help) > Have a nice weekend! > > -- > Jos I'm looking at: Id: test001.nt,v 1.4 2001/12/03 14:46:44 josderoo Exp Id: test001.rdf,v 1.4 2001/12/03 14:46:49 josderoo Exp I sorta expected to see an entailment test, not just an example arrangement of properties. But as an example/explanation, it looks fine. I'm happy to see it approved. I'd like to see an entailment test (to show that the transitive closure of parent is *not* entialed) added at some point, but it's not critical. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 7 December 2001 10:02:21 UTC