- From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 22:49:24 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > There's a substantive issue but to play games I will start with it as > > Procedurally: > > [[ > The negative testcase > rdfms-nested-bagIDs/test007.rdf > > is recorded as having been approved at > > RDFCore WG Telecon 2003-01-10 > > however it is not recorded as such in the minutes; nor was it in the agenda. > > I request that the positive test case > rdfms-nested-bagIDs/test007.rdf > as approved at > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Mar/0235.html > > be shown in this document. > ]] > > moreover, > [[ > I think the test was correct as originally stated and is currently incorrect. > ]] > > (I am happy to ignore the procedural issue, really - but I did follow the > links and was disappointed = i.e. I still can't tell why this test got > changed - nor can I tell why I didn't vote against such change) Jeremy, thanks, I'll track this down. What's the substantive issue? -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/ They modified their trousers secretly.
Received on Thursday, 20 February 2003 17:52:29 UTC