[RIF] Import directives in test cases - changes to approved test cases?

The RIF, RDF & OWL Compatibility document defines the arguments of Import 
directives to both be IRI constants.  So would it be ok to change the 
import directives in the relevant test cases, including the 5 approved 
ones listed below,  from e.g.: 
        Import(http://example.org/mygraph   
http://www.w3.org/2007/rif-import-profile#OWL-DL-annotation)
to e.g. 
        Import(<http://example.org/mygraph>   <
http://www.w3.org/2007/rif-import-profile#OWL-DL-annotation>)

(adding angle brackets to make the arguments IRICONSTs)

 For the approved ones,  I would note it in the 'changes since WG 
approval' field, and the tests would show up on the [6] page.

For both the PS and XML versions of the test cases stored in the 
repository, the location part of the directive would be updated to be an 
actual location of the imported file.

Stella

[1]  http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Annotation_Entailment
[2]  
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Individual-Data_Separation_Inconsistency
[3]  http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Non-Annotation_Entailment
[4]  
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/OWL_Combination_Vocabulary_Separation_Inconsistency_1
[5]  
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/OWL_Combination_Vocabulary_Separation_Inconsistency_2

[6]  http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Category:ChangedSinceApproval


p.s.
An alternate style for the Import directives, used in a few of the test 
cases,  is: Import(mygraph <
http://www.w3.org/2007/rif-import-profile#OWL-DL-annotation>), which has 
the advantage that wiki readers won't think there should actually be a 
file at the given location, but the disadvantage that it provides a 
syntactically incorrect example.