W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org > May 2012

Re: RDB2RDF WG agenda for 2012-05-08 meeting 1600 UTC

From: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 11:02:03 -0500
Message-Id: <30F840B0-FD11-498D-9F46-FE5196FD1E9B@gmail.com>
Cc: RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
To: "ashok.malhotra@oracle.com" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
Running a few minutes late

Juan Sequeda
www.juansequeda.com

On May 8, 2012, at 6:38 AM, ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> wrote:

> ---------------------------------------------------------
> AGENDA Teleconference
> W3C RDB2RDF Working Group telephone conference 2012-05-08
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> *16:00-17:00 UTC*
> Local time:
> 
> 
> http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=05&day=01&year=2012&hour=16&min=00&sec=0
> 
> 
> Bridge US: +1-617-761-6200 (Zakim)
> Conference code: 7322733# (spells "RDB2RDF")
> IRC channel : #RDB2RDF on irc.w3.org:6665 W3C
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Chair: Ashok
> Scribe: ?
> 
> We have only one remaining issue and we need to close that today.  Please read the mail
> on this issue and be prepared to discuss.
> 
> 1. Admin
> 
> PROPOSAL: Accept the minutes of last meetinghttp://www.w3.org/2012/05/01-RDB2RDF-minutes.html
> 
> 2. Implementability for tables w/o primary key
> 
> +http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2012Apr/0030.html
> +http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2012Apr/0036.html
> +http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2012Apr/0019.html
> 
> PROPOSAL A: In the DM spec, replace the following text:
> 
> [[
> If the table has no primary key, the row node is a fresh blank node that is unique to this row.
> ]]
> 
> with this:
> 
> [[
> If the table has no primary key, the row node is a blank node. Distinct blank nodes MUST be generated for rows with distinct column values. For duplicate rows with identical values, implementations SHOULD generate a fresh blank for each duplicate row (resulting in a non-lean RDF graph [RDF Semantics]). However, if the underlying database system does not provide any means to reliably differentiate among the rows, then implementations MAY re-use the same blank node for multiple duplicate rows (resulting in a lean RDF graph). Implementations SHOULD document and advertise their chosen behavior.
> ]]
> 
> PROPOSAL B.
> o In the DM, instead of "is intended to provide a default behavior for R2RML: RDB to RDF Mapping Language" say "is intended to provide a default behavior for R2RML: RDB to RDF Mapping Language for tables which have at least one unique key"
> 
> o Add to the R2RML document (probably in the intro part): "R2RML implementations are encouraged to provide a default mapping equivalent to the Direct Mapping for tables which have at least one unique key"
> 
> o Add a Note to R2RML 6.1: "Because rr:IRI and rr:BlankNode subject labels are generated from column values, R2RML mappings do not preserve repeated rows in SQL databases."
> 
> 3.  If we get closure on the above issue, discussion about publication.
> 
> 4. AOB
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> All the best, Ashok
> 
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2012 16:03:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 May 2012 16:03:04 GMT