- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 19:01:44 +0100 (BST)
- To: "Souri Das" <Souripriya.Das@oracle.com>
- Cc: bvillazon@fi.upm.es, "Hausenblas, Michael" <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, "RDB2RDF WG" <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
> Boris Villazón Terrazas wrote: >> Hi Souri,all >> >> I updated the figures according to version 1.25, you can find them at: >> >> http://mccarthy.dia.fi.upm.es/rdb2rdf/img/TriplesMap.png >> http://mccarthy.dia.fi.upm.es/rdb2rdf/img/ForeignKey.png >> http://mccarthy.dia.fi.upm.es/rdb2rdf/img/RDFTermMap.png >> >> >> I have a question, I'm not sure how exactly represent this >> rr:tableGraphIRI rdfs:range <Set of valid IRI references> . >> >> it is included in the figure >> http://mccarthy.dia.fi.upm.es/rdb2rdf/img/TriplesMap.png >> > That looked fine for rr:tableGraphIRI. > > We needed the same thing for the new property, rr:columnGraphIRI. > Noticed that it is not included in the latest RDFTermMap diagram (Fig 1) > in the R2RML FPWD. > > Also, realized that the captions of Fig 1, 3, and 4 are not fully > accurate (because these are not RDF graphs, rather a way of showing > domains and ranges). > > But, it is too late and also I am ok with these minor > omissions/inaccuracies because the text has the complete information any > way. > I think captions and diagrams being minorly off are OK, but we should fix that ASAP in the editor's draft and in the next version of R2RML. > Thanks, > - Souri. >> Would you pls check it and let me know if it is ok? >> >> Thanks >> >> Boris >> >> >> >> On 27/10/2010 7:50, Hausenblas, Michael wrote: >>> Souri, >>> >>> Great to learn things worked out, thanks a lot! However, I'm confused >>> re the figures - Boris said he has done it and Richard uploaded them. >>> >>> Can you please check and confirm we are good to go ASAP? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Michael >> > > >
Received on Wednesday, 27 October 2010 18:02:00 UTC