W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdb2rdf-comments@w3.org > October 2011

Editorial comments on R2RML

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 16:54:28 +0200
Cc: public-rdb2rdf-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <456DDB15-00F2-4D5C-AD21-1541569BFD55@w3.org>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Souripriya Das <Souripriya.Das@oracle.com>, Seema Sundara <seema.sundara@oracle.com>
None of these are major:

Section 7.3

The example refers to the IRI-safe template value using the following:

[] rr:subjectMap [ rr:template "http://data.example.com/site/{LOC}" ].

the IRI-safe version kicks in only if the term is declared to be an IRI. I know that this is defined, later, to be the default case for subject map using a template but it may be worth making this clear in the text (or simply add the extra rr:termType to the example.)

-----
Section 7.6, first sentence

langauge -> language

----
Section 9.1 
(I am not sure the remark should go to this section, though)

I would expect that if I have:

[] rr:subjectMap [ rr:termType rr:BlankNode ] ;

in a triple map, what this means is that each row has a newly generated blank node as a subject. I wonder whether it is worth making this fact explicit in the document, it may not be entirely obvious.

----
Appendix:

The previous version of the document had a number of examples that were very helpful. It is a pity to throw them away. Either we should plan for a separate primer document (but I am not sure we will have the energy for that) or we should put those back into the spec document as an (obviously informal) appendix.

Cheers

Ivan

----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Tuesday, 4 October 2011 14:53:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 4 October 2011 14:53:36 GMT