- 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