- From: David McNeil <dmcneil@revelytix.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:53:16 -0500
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2011 14:53:49 UTC
> > > > > If the user wants a hybrid of these two models then they can generate > the Direct Mapping for an RDB and then replace parts of it with a > hand-crafted R2RML mapping. > > > > > > > I am not sure I understand that one. You mean generate an R2RML that > would correspond to a Direct Mapping? > > > > > > What I mean is to use a Direct Mapping tool to produce an R2RML mapping > file for an RDB. > > Yes, that is what I meant. An R2RML representation of the DM results for > that particular RDB. > > If we go down that route, it would be worthwhile having an appendix in > either the r2rml or the dm document that gives a precise mapping of the dm > to r2rml. This should not be left to implementers to be figured out > separately. > Agreed. I was thinking the Direct Mapping was expressed in terms of R2RML, but I see now that is not the case. -David
Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2011 14:53:49 UTC