W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdb2rdf-comments@w3.org > August 2012

Re: direct mapping row node IRI PK order

From: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 13:16:45 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMVTWDwMy9+612fvU++NTix+rEfhKivQ2Op9kmFyV6ny+qCraw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Tyson <phtyson@sbcglobal.net>
Cc: public-rdb2rdf-comments@w3.org

Apologies for the late reply.

It seems that a response to your email was sent to another rdb2rdf mailing

Eric's response:
Richard's response:

Does this answer your question?


Juan Sequeda

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:14 PM, Paul Tyson <phtyson@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Regarding http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PR-rdb-direct-mapping-20120814/.
> The definition of the row node IRI in section 3 says "for each column in
> the primary key, in order...".
> Is there a canonical ordering for primary key constraints? The examples
> appear to follow the order of PK declaration in a DDL clause.
> Perhaps the definition should clarify the intended order of PK column
> names in the row node IRI. If such an order cannot be reliably derived
> from database metadata, maybe lexical ordering could be prescribed.
> Also, in the row node definition, the last 3rd-level bullet says "if it
> is not the last column in the foreign key,...". Perhaps that should be
> "...in the primary key,..."?
> Regards,
> --Paul
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2012 18:17:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:45:17 UTC