W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-csv-wg@w3.org > November 2014

Re: Could primaryKey be specified directly as a column name?

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@wu.ac.at>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 14:32:41 +0100
Cc: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, W3C CSV on the Web Working Group <public-csv-wg@w3.org>, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Message-Id: <0A44DD52-1959-48D7-82CD-B7207DCEA899@wu.ac.at>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>

> Data Shapes WG is by charter and membership wholeheartedly by/for/in RDF. CSV WG is not. The best we can expect at
> this stage is to communicate, rather than common spec IMHO.

fair enough, what I meant here was if metadata properties were used for both groups to describe such kind of constraints,
they should hopefully be compatible.

Axel
--
Prof. Dr. Axel Polleres
Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna
url: http://www.polleres.net/  twitter: @AxelPolleres

On 03 Nov 2014, at 13:17, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:

> 
> On 3 Nov 2014 11:37, "Axel Polleres" <axel.polleres@wu.ac.at> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Jeni, all,
> >
> > just a guts feeling: Things like 'primary key' are constraints on the data. Another group is primarily concerned with constraints on data and validation of these: http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/
> >
> > In the F2F meeting of the DRF Data Shapes WG I noted that I would be surprised if basic SQL constraints (like primary/foreign key constrainrs would NOT be covered there), so likewise here I wonder whether these constraints are something we shouldn't do in liaison with the RDF data shapes group, rather  than specifying properties in isolation.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> 
> Data Shapes WG is by charter and membership wholeheartedly by/for/in RDF. CSV WG is not. The best we can expect at this stage is to communicate, rather than common spec IMHO.
> 
> Dan
> 
> > Axel
> >
> > --
> > Prof. Dr. Axel Polleres
> > Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna
> > url: http://www.polleres.net/  twitter: @AxelPolleres
> >
> > On 03 Nov 2014, at 11:53, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi David,
> > >
> > > This was an attempt to make the metadata JSON be good JSON-LD. The draft now just uses the “name” property and references those names within “primaryKey", which makes it easier to write but requires a bit more application logic.
> > >
> > > Jeni
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
> > > Reply: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>>
> > > Date: 1 November 2014 at 20:36:05
> > > To: public-csv-wg@w3.org <public-csv-wg@w3.org>>
> > > Subject:  Could primaryKey be specified directly as a column name?
> > >
> > >> In the 30-Oct-2014 draft at
> > >> http://w3c.github.io/csvw/csv2rdf/
> > >> there is a very nice, simple example in Sec 4. (Thanks for that!) But
> > >> I'm wondering about one detail.
> > >>
> > >> Example 3 shows CSV metadata, which includes:
> > >>
> > >> . . .
> > >> "columns": [{
> > >> "@id": "_:GID",
> > >> "name": "GID",
> > >> "datatype": "integer"
> > >> }, {
> > >> . . .
> > >> "primaryKey": "_:GID"
> > >> }]
> > >> . . .
> > >>
> > >> I notice that the value provided for "primaryKey" above is specified as
> > >> an indirect identifier ("_:GID") for the primary key column, instead of
> > >> being directly specified as the column name "GID". I assume that there
> > >> is some rationale for doing it this way -- perhaps so that the metadata
> > >> can specify duplicate column names, though wouldn't that be a bad use
> > >> case to support? -- but it seems cumbersome and error prone. Can this
> > >> be simplified to allow the "primaryKey" to be specified directly as the
> > >> column name?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> David
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jeni Tennison
> > > http://www.jenitennison.com/
> > >
> >
> >
Received on Monday, 3 November 2014 13:33:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:27:45 UTC