- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 15:12:13 -0500
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- CC: public-csv-wg-comments@w3.org
On 02/21/2014 07:07 AM, Dan Brickley wrote: > > On 20 Feb 2014 21:25, "David Booth" <david@dbooth.org > <mailto:david@dbooth.org>> wrote: > > > > Above all else, regardless of what other features the working group > may choose to define, please define a standard *CSV+ *Direct Mapping** > from any CSV+ table to RDF. > > > > By "CSV+ Direct Mapping" I mean a mapping that is fully defined even > in the absence of any information that is not contained directly within > the target table. In particular, a Direct Mapping must be fully defined > even in the absence of any table metadata or mapping rules. > > > > Thanks! > > David Booth > > Care to ground this request in a use case writeup - i.e. how it might be > useful in real life? What problem would it solve, and for whom? Sure. Would the following be adequate? [[ Title: CSV+ Direct Mapping The overall goal is to be able to predictably view all data uniformly as RDF, even though it may be serialized in a wide variety of formats, including those that are not natively RDF serializations, such as CSV+. Independent parties using different tools should see the same information when viewing CSV+ data as RDF. A key reason for using a direct mapping -- whether for CSV+, relational data or anything else -- is to cleanly separate the *syntactic* issue of mapping non-native-RDF formats to RDF, from the *semantic* issue of model alignment, in which model transformations are routinely needed. By standardizing the direct mappings, RDF-to-RDF transformations can be more readily shared, because they can assume a predictable starting point based on the direct mapping. For example, Alice, using the W3C-compliant AlphaWorks Uniform RDF Deserializer, reads a CSV+ spreadsheet from http://example/table.tsv . The AlphaWorks Deserializer, following W3C standards, finds no information about the spreadsheet beyond what is contained in table.tsv itself. Thus, it uses the default **CSV+ Direct Mapping** to interpret the spreadsheet as RDF. Bob, using the W3C-compliant BetaTech Universal RDF Slurper, reads the same CSV+ spreadsheet from http://example/table.tsv . The BetaTech Slurper, following W3C standards, also finds no information about the spreadsheet beyond what is contained in table.tsv itself. Thus, it too uses the default **CSV+ Direct Mapping** to interpret the spreadsheet as RDF. Alice and Bob then talk by phone about the RDF content of the spreadsheet. Because they know that their software has following the W3C standards, they are assured that they are talking about the *same* RDF graph (or at least isomorphic). This makes them much happier than they were before standardization, because it allows them to share RDF-to-RDF transformations that can be applied to the resulting RDF graph. Prior to standardization, they were unable to share RDF-to-RDF transformations, because their RDF deserializers produced different RDF from the same CSV+ data. ]] Thanks, David
Received on Friday, 21 February 2014 20:12:41 UTC