Re: ISSUE-57 and ISSUE-72 implemented (was: Re: 2011-12-20 meeting minutes)

…and a diff including the latest changes is here:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/diffs/1.160-1.183.html

Best,
Richard


On 20 Dec 2011, at 19:05, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> On 20 Dec 2011, at 18:02, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/12/20-RDB2RDF-minutes.html
>> 
>> [[
>> RESOLUTION: Close ISSUE-72 with no action. Add an example using an R2RML view.
>> ]]
> 
> Example added here:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/#example-translationtable
> 
>> [[
>> RESOLUTION: Close ISSUE-57 with:
>> §1 An R2RML processor is a system that, given an R2RML mapping and an input database, provides access to the output dataset.
>> §2 An RDF graph that represents an R2RML mapping is called an R2RML mapping graph.
>> §3 An R2RML mapping document is any document written in the Turtle [TURTLE] RDF syntax that encodes an R2RML mapping graph.
>> §4 A conforming R2RML processor SHOULD accept R2RML mapping documents in Turtle syntax. It MAY accept R2RML mapping graphs encoded in other RDF syntaxes.
>> ]]
> 
> Implemented in the spec – this just required changing MUST to SHOULD in the last sentence.
> 
> §1 is found here:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/#dfn-r2rml-processor
> 
> §2 is found here:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/#dfn-r2rml-mapping-graph
> 
> §3 and §4 are in this subsection:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/#syntax
> 
> Best,
> Richard

Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2011 19:45:47 UTC