- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 13:00:25 +0100 (BST)
- To: "Juan Sequeda" <juanfederico@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org
> Hi Everybody > > I've seen the use of Default Mapping and Direct Mapping in several places. > Soeren also pointed this out in his comments. So, what do these terms > mean? > Or are they the same? > > We need to come to a consensus asap! I think either term is OK as long as it is well-specified. > > IMO, a Direct Mapping is a mapping from a RDB to RDF where tuple pk are > subjects, attributes of a table are predicates and the values are objects > (or something like this... this will be clearly defined in the direct > mapping document). A RDB2RDF system should use the direct mapping as the > default mapping, meaning, when the user does not customize a mapping and > lets the RDB2RDF system expose the RDB data automatically as RDF, it will > do > it by the direct mapping. Agreed. The Direct Mapping is clearly Eric's algorithm. > > I'm guessing that R2RML document needs to reference the Direct Mapping > document. Can a FPWD reference a document that is not ready? I do not feel > comfortable about this. I'm OK in a FPWD in referring to an Editor's document. Also, one could thing would be to copy an English-language version of the algorithm from Eric's document and put it in R2RML. Therefore, if people *just* want to implement the direct mapping document, they can, but also we make sure that the direct mapping document and R2RML are on the same page. > > Juan Sequeda > +1-575-SEQ-UEDA > www.juansequeda.com >
Received on Monday, 25 October 2010 12:00:27 UTC