- From: Boris Villazón Terrazas <bvillazon@fi.upm.es>
- Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 20:06:55 +0100
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
- CC: rdB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 30/11/2010 19:55, Harry Halpin wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> After a quick look at the minutes, I think you suggested sth like >> >> - the expected default mapping result as separate entry >> - reorganization of the test cases, sth like >> direct graph mapping >> features of the r2rml >> - put the db-direct pairs in the first half of the document? >> - In TC3, due to absence of primary key, the subject will be a bNode? >> - it might be better to have one kind of test cases for direct, and >> another kind for r2rml? >> > I think Eric proposed that we have the test-cases organized by database, > and then after each database a single direct graph test-cases and then > multiple R2RML test-cases. > > -db1 > -direct graph1 > -r2rml 1a > -r2rml 1b > > -db2 > -direct graph2 > -r2rml 2a > -r2rml 2b > -r2rml 2c > > I thought it might be easier to do it linearly (i.e. direct graph then > R2RML), but I'm OK with Eric's sugggestion. I suspect Richard is as well. > Thanks Harry, I'll reorganize them for the next telcon. Best Boris
Received on Tuesday, 30 November 2010 19:07:30 UTC