Re: Second Round of RDB2RDF UC doc review

One of my comments [1] for "then" Section 3 examples and "then" Section 4.1.8 (MANYTOMANY) was to replace the names of persons with more generic names. In the new revised version, Section 3 has been removed and Section 4.1.8 has become Section 3.1.10 (MANYTOMANY). 

I'd suggest replacing the names with something from the following list, if it is okay with other members:

   1. Sneezy
   2. Sleepy
   3. Dopey
   4. Doc
   5. Happy
   6. Bashful
   7. Grumpy

"Doc" may be left out if we need only 6 names.

Thanks,
- Souri.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Souri%27s_UCR_Review


----- Original Message -----
From: michael.hausenblas@deri.org
To: public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 6:29:34 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: Second Round of RDB2RDF UC doc review


All,

Thanks everyone for the productive meeting yesterday - we're almost there
with the UC document.

I have now worked in all of yesterday's resolutions (and my respective
actions) resulting in $Id: Overview.xml,v 1.55 2010/05/26 10:20:44 mhausenb
Exp $ [1]. Note that ANY further comments should be against this version
(1.55) and must be clear and unambiguous (REMOVE this, ADD this, whatever).

The changes I made (compared to v1.48 of [1] we discussed yesterday) are:

===

1.49: minor fixes (UC1 and 4.1.2 title) as spotted by Juan

1.50:
addressed: "RESOLUTION: Keep glossary, move to end." [1]

[1] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/25-rdb2rdf-minutes.html#item03

1.51:
addressed: "Update UC2 reqs re ETL." [1] and also added new requirement
(4.1.5 ETL - Extract-Transform-Load) as well as some re-ordering of the reqs
to have a better flow



[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/57

1.52:
addressed: "RESOLUTION: Use reqs from Section 4 to update UC4" with my
ACTION-58 [1]


[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/58

1.53:
addressed: "RESOLUTION: To put a link to the full excerpt in the OBO
example, not an excerpt" [1] --- need Juan's pointer to the ontology to
complete this




[1] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/25-rdb2rdf-minutes.html#item03

1.54:
addressed: "RESOLUTION: Section 3 should be moved to Appendix" [1]

[1] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/25-rdb2rdf-minutes.html#item03

1.55:
removed requirement "Database connection" as requested by Ashok and Ahmed
(checked back with Soeren and is ok for him)

===

Cheers,
      Michael

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/use-cases/

-- 
Dr. Michael Hausenblas
LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
http://sw-app.org/about.html



> From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
> Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 14:04:38 +0100
> To: RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
> Subject: Second Round of RDB2RDF UC doc review
> Resent-From: RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
> Resent-Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 13:05:16 +0000
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> The latest version of the "Use Cases and Requirements for Mapping Relational
> Databases to RDF" document with $Id: Overview.xml,v 1.47 2010/05/25 12:24:01
> mhausenb Exp $ is now available [1].
>             
> I've incorporated all editorial/grammatical/typo-level issues. The remaining
> issues to be discussed today are listed at [2].
> 
> Harry, can you please provide the logs to be filled into the Wiki page [3]?
> 
> Cheers,
>       Michael
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/use-cases/
> [2] 
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Use_Cases_and_Requirements/Reviews#Op
> en_Issues
> [3] 
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Use_Cases_and_Requirements/Reviews#Ch
> ange_Logs
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Michael Hausenblas
> LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
> DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
> Ireland, Europe
> Tel. +353 91 495730
> http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
> http://sw-app.org/about.html
> 
> 
>

Received on Sunday, 30 May 2010 19:24:10 UTC