Re: IRI or URI

Actually, my mail may have been just wasted bandwidth, a.k.a. noise, because the DM explicitly refers to IRI-s already (which is perfectly fine with me!) and so does R2RML.

Sorry...

Ivan


On Feb 16, 2011, at 14:01 , Percy Enrique Rivera Salas wrote:

> Dear Ivan,
> 
> I guess IRI should be the best choice, following what the other groups have done
> (OWL2, SPARQL, RIF, RDFa) let me reference a discussion about this topic
> in the "Semantic Web Mailing List" in the following link
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2010Nov/0036.html
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Percy
> 
> 2011/2/16 Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
> Guys,
> 
> a simple question. What happens if the column name contains non basic ASCII characters? Ie, accented Latin, Russian, Chinese...?
> 
> For Direct Mapping: We have to decide whether we use IRIs or whether the default is to convert IRIs into URIs according to the specs. My instinct would be to generate IRIs, but I am not sure the tooling around us is good enough.
> 
> For R2RML: I am not familiar enough with SQL to know whether its usage to generate a virtual table covers all the possibilities. Ie, if I want to convert into URI, is it a trivial thing to do? Is it worth having some shorthands like the templates?
> 
> This may not be a serious issue. But it is certaintly worth writing it down somewhere in the documents
> 
> Ivan
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman
> Tel:+31 641044153
> http://www.ivan-herman.net
> 
> 
> 
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf