- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 12:03:26 +0100
- To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
- cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>>>jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com said: > would like to see added approval of > > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/statement-entailment/Manifest.rdf Look OK for test001, test002 combinations > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfs-domain-and-range/Manifest.rdf Look OK test001-004. conjunction looks ok. > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfs-subPropertyOf-semantics/Manifest.rdf > -> after correction that this is just 1 test i.e. test001.nt |- test002.nt > which we approved, didn't we ?? (even with afterwards pinging DanC/PatH) Look OK for test001.rdf->test001.nt and test002->test002.nt There is no test001->test002 in the manifest Dave
Received on Friday, 26 April 2002 07:03:29 UTC