Re: A draft outline for the CSV2RDF document

On 19/05/14 19:58, Ivan Herman wrote:
> I am lost again. That means we have some processing rules to convert
> the metadata into arow template; what are those?

They would go where you have:

3.1.2 Field level metadata

and do the same thing except instead of talking about generating 
triples, it generates text fragments for the template.  (An 
implementation is, of course, free to do it directly - we're defining 
the effect, not the implementation)

> How do they compare
> to the rule set with fiel-templates?

In the case where there is a generated template it should be the same 
capabilities.  If the converter can output templates it generates, then 
a user might wish to take those as a starting point for a more 
sophisticated conversion.

	Andy

>
> Ivan
>
> --- Ivan Herman Tel:+31 641044153 http://www.ivan-herman.net
>
> (Written on mobile, sorry for brevity and misspellings...)
>
>
>
>> On 19 May 2014, at 20:44, Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 19/05/14 18:09, Ivan Herman wrote: Ok, now I understand the
>>> difference, thanks. Indeed, I use templates for one term; again,
>>> just as R2RML does.
>>>
>>> I am a little bit afraid of the potential complexity of that
>>> approach. The one-term-template is pretty straightforward both
>>> for the implementation and the user, is syntax independent and
>>> can be easily re-used for XML or JSON, too. The per-row-template
>>> seems to be syntax dependent and more complex though, clearly,
>>> much more powerful. I have to think about it...
>>
>> The user isn't required to provide a (row) template so if they
>> write:
>>
>> "columns" : [{ "name" : "air-temperature" , "type" : "xsd:double"
>> }]
>>
>> the conversion behaves as if the template used were a big string:
>> (no need to understand the structure) ------------- [
>> :air-temperature "{air-temperature}"^^xsd:double ] -------------
>>
>> and the user never sees the template.
>>
>> There are going to be per-syntax issues - escaping for example.
>> Turtle ""-strings aren't the same as XML content.
>>
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Ivan
>>
>>

Received on Monday, 19 May 2014 19:30:17 UTC