- From: David McNeil <dmcneil@revelytix.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 10:28:39 -0600
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: RDB2RDF Working Group WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 6 December 2011 16:29:15 UTC
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>wrote: > ISSUE-75: Reconsider rr:tableName syntactic sugar > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/75 > > In last week's minutes you're recorded as saying: > > “there are still legitimate questions unanswered about Issue-75” [1] > > May I ask you what change you are seeking related to this issue, or what > concerns you have regarding the design of this feature and its definition > in the R2RML ED? > Richard - There are several questions identified in Issue-75. It seems to me that we should hash out consensus on those questions before including this syntactic sugar to the spec. -David
Received on Tuesday, 6 December 2011 16:29:15 UTC