- From: RDB2RDF Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 13:34:16 +0000
- To: public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org
ISSUE-57 (r2rml-document-syntax): R2RML doesn't allow R2RML documents in RDF/XML syntax [R2RML] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/57 Raised by: Richard Cyganiak On product: R2RML The way R2RML is currently defined, there are: a) R2RML mapping graphs -- an RDF graph that encodes an R2RML mapping b) R2RML mapping documents -- a Turtle serialization of an R2RML mapping graph An R2RML processor MUST support R2RML mapping *documents* (in Turtle), but MAY support R2RML mapping *graphs* (in any syntax). There are some perceived downsides of this design: 1. According to the definition, an R2RML mapping graph in RDF/XML would *not* be a conforming R2RML mapping document. This is not intuitive. 2. RDF is about model, not about syntax, so why define R2RML in RDF, and then tie it to a particular syntax? (The obvious alternate design would be: *Just* define R2RML mapping graphs, without talking about syntax at all. But this has drawn a strong objection: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2011Jun/0165.html )
Received on Monday, 25 July 2011 13:34:17 UTC