- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 16:00:52 +0100
- To: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>, RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 20 Oct 2010, at 15:26, Juan Sequeda wrote: > We should (at least for us) create a glossary of terms (put it on > the wiki?) > so anybody who reads the document and may be confused about a term, > can know > exactly what we are referring to. I think it makes sense to put these definitions into the R2RML draft as well, because not every reader will be motivated to look them up in the SQL spec. But I'm afraid this will have to wait until after FPWD. If someone wants to start compiling relevant definitions from the SQL spec on the wiki, then the editors could use that as a basis for a new section in the draft. Best, Richard > >> >> I notice this definition elides the uniqueness of the column names, >> which is true of SQL but not of relational algebra. Are there any use >> cases which motivate us going beyond the relational data accessible >> to >> SQL, e.g. the two name attributes in:? >> ┌────┬──────┬───────┐ >> │ ID │ name │ name │ >> ├────┼──────┼───────┤ >> │ 7 │ Bob │ Smith │ >> └────┴──────┴───────┘ >> >>> Part 2 defines the SQL language. >>> >>> Part 11 defines the Information Schema (the standard way of finding >>> out which tables and columns are available in a database). >>> >>> The other parts are not relevant for SQL Core. >>> >>> Best, >>> Richard >>> >> >> -- >> -ericP >> >>
Received on Wednesday, 20 October 2010 15:01:28 UTC