Re: Model / Syntax Updates

Hi

nice modeling. Is the annotated data model in the direction of defining
also a parsing model?


for the
EXAMPLE 2
name,street,city,country,street1,city1,country1

i would suggest instead using something like:
name,street_1,city_1,country_1,street_2,city_2,country_2

for the rewrites, as it permits to deduce the original column name and order



Alfredo




2014-02-23 19:23 GMT+01:00 Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>:

> Hi,
>
> Following the call last week, I have made some updates to the "Syntax for
> Tabular Data on the Web” document at
>
>   http://w3c.github.io/csvw/syntax/
>
> Namely:
>
>   * I have separated out three levels of data model:
>     * a core data model which is just tables/columns/rows/fields
>     * an annotated data model in which each of these can be annotated
>     * a grouped data model in which there are multiple tables in a group
>
>   * I have stated that the ordering of columns is significant in the core
> data model
>
> I have defined the annotated data model extremely loosely: it just says
> that tables, columns, rows, fields and regions can be annotated, but it
> doesn’t say anything about what those annotations might look like (eg that
> one of the annotations might be the *type* of a value). I think the
> direction I’d like to take that is to retain this very loose definition and
> then state that there are certain annotations (eg 'type', 'unique') that
> are understood by particular types of applications (eg validators,
> converters) in particular ways. Does that seem like a reasonable approach?
>
> I haven’t made any attempt to tackle the syntax for annotated or grouped
> tables as yet.
>
> Jeni
> --
> Jeni Tennison
> http://www.jenitennison.com/
>
>