Re: TEST: description-logic-668

Very odd ...

I might look at the CVS history for these.

Jeremy

Jos De_Roo wrote:

> Jeremy - description-logic-208 *had* in it's conclusion
>   oiled:V16448 rdf:type oiled:C122.
> (which is now removed and in nonentailment test 209)
> The observation is that that triple is actually also
> gone from the conslusion of description-logic-668
> which is why we pass it :-)
> 
>  --
> Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
> 
> 
>