Re: follow up on TOOLS - what is your opinion?

Hi David,

Looks good to me (too)! :D

—
Kind regards
Pieter Heyvaert
Ghent University, IDLab - imec
@HeyPieter
On 29 Oct 2020, 21:59 +0100, David Chaves <dchaves@fi.upm.es>, wrote:
> Dear all,
> Last but not least, our ideas about the next steps about tools and evaluation methods.
>
> We suggest
>  • waiting for results from use cases discussion before proceeding further with discussions on how the use cases may reflect on the data
>  • organizing a smaller group to discuss on methods for evaluating and comparing tools
>  • organizing a smaller group on a set of new test cases that could be considered for heterogeneous data beyond what was already proposed for R2RML and was translated for heterogeneous data (https://github.com/RMLio/rml-test-cases). The idea is then, similarly to mapping languages, that people can write down their approach of tackling the challenge as a scientific paper.
>  • organizing a smaller group to revive and keep it alive a new R2RML implementation report (https://github.com/kg-construct/r2rml-implementation-report)
>
> The different options do not exclude each other!
>
> We welcome comments on the suggestions, proposals on how to proceed and of course intend of participation in any of the two above.
>
>
> Best regards,
> David
>
> David Chaves
> PhD Student
> Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)
> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
>