- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 22:46:52 +0200
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
> > that's nice > > I was able to run the cwm converted manifest test > > http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/FunctionalProperty/Manifest.n3 > > "as is" (I mean no manual editing) > > just a pity that your comments are lost in the n3 file :-( > > > > A couple of questions/points about the conversion > > 1: what happened to rtest prefix; it got truncated to "" > which means (I think) that my rdf:ID="test001" > instead of mapping to URL > > http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/FunctionalProperty/Manifest.rdf#test001 > > got mapped to > > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/testSchema#test001 > > or perhaps > > http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/FunctionalProperty/Manifest.nt#test001 > > (Crucial part of n3 file) > <#test001> a otest:PositiveEntailmentTest; oops... I ran it again (this time fetching from the web) cwm --rdf http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/FunctionalProperty/Manifest --n3 and also cwm --rdf http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/FunctionalProperty/Manifest --ntriples and that is producing the triple <http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/FunctionalProperty/Manifest#test001> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/testOntology#PositiveEntailmentTest> . which is OK I think sorry about the confusion, cwm is OK I think (and I have trouble with ../../ stuff...) > 2: Literal trimming. > The whitespace in my rdfs:comments got reformatted in your conversion. > (Not a big deal in this case) Dan? -- , Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Thursday, 1 August 2002 16:47:31 UTC