- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 18:56:53 +0000
- To: Fabian Pijcke <fabian.pijcke@gmail.com>
- Cc: David McNeil <dmcneil@revelytix.com>, public-rdb2rdf-comments@w3.org
Hi Fabian, On 22 Oct 2011, at 17:07, Fabian Pijcke wrote: >> My first thought is that this is something to be done on top of R2RML rather than in R2RML. Meaning that something outside of R2RML would know about the set of available logical table resources and at runtime would produce an R2RML mapping with the logical table appropriate for the database being accessed. > > I agree with that, so the best solution is certainly that SQL (and not R2RML) adds such a feature (every vendor implements the feature, why not SQL itself ?). Since your comment was made in the Last Call phase, the working group has to formally address your comment. You say above that you agree with David's view that the feature you proposed would best be added on top of R2RML or in SQL itself, rather than in the R2RML language. Does this mean that we can consider your comment as addressed to your satisfaction? Thanks and all the best, Richard
Received on Monday, 7 November 2011 18:57:34 UTC