- From: Boris Villazon-Terrazas <bvillazon@fi.upm.es>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 12:33:11 +0200
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Cc: public-rdb2rdf-comments@w3.org
- Message-Id: <899BDEDB-A235-48B7-9541-579B91B29CA8@fi.upm.es>
Hi Toby
We updated the TC document [1] and repos [2] with your suggestions, fixing the bnode ids and base namespace.
Thanks!
Boris
[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/test-cases/
[2] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdb2rdf-tests
On Jun 12, 2012, at 5:20 PM, Toby Inkster wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 15:09:06 +0200
> Boris Villazon-Terrazas <bvillazon@fi.upm.es> wrote:
>
>> The base IRI of the r2rml mappings is only for the mappings, not for
>> the resultant triples/quads
>
> I disagree - the base URI of the mappings makes a difference to the
> output. Given...
>
> @base <http://example.net/foo/> .
>
> <#TriplesMap1>
> rr:logicalTable [ rr:tableName "employees" ];
> rr:subjectMap [
> rr:template "http://data.example.com/employee/{id}";
> rr:class <Bar>;
> ].
>
> Then this will produce a triple of the form:
>
> <http://data.example.com/employee/123>
> rdf:type <http://example.net/foo/Bar> .
>
> The base URI of the R2RML mapping document absolutely does make a
> difference to the output here.
>
> If the mapping document had said this:
>
> @base <http://example.net/foo/> .
>
> <#TriplesMap1>
> rr:logicalTable [ rr:tableName "employees" ];
> rr:subjectMap [
> rr:template "http://data.example.com/employee/{id}";
> ] ;
> rr:predicateObjectMap [
> rr:predicate rdf:type ;
> rr:objectMap [
> rr:template "Bar";
> rr:termType rr:IRI;
> ]
> ].
>
> Then its base URI wouldn't make any difference.
>
> --
> Toby A Inkster
> <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2012 10:33:45 UTC