- From: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 11:10:45 -0400
- To: David McNeil <dmcneil@revelytix.com>
- Cc: RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 09:50 -0500, David McNeil wrote: > At Semtech this week I have talked to two separate people who were > interested in R2RML and who thought it was important for R2RML to > support the conversion of data in the relational database to URIs. I > believe they were talking about both: > > * the case where the data in the database contains the data necessary > to produce the URI (e.g. "John Smith" -> "http://people/john_smith"). > There was a desire expressed to do this without writing the SQL or > SPARQL expression to perform the conversion. > > * the case where the data in the database does not provide sufficient > data to produce the URI (e.g. a code of "js25" needs to be translated > to "http://people/john_smith"). > > Of course R2RML has the template feature which can partially be used > to address the first case (but not without writing a SQL/SPARQL > expression to do case conversion on the input data), but not the > second. If the information is not in the database, how do you expect R2RML to know about it? > In the past I believe we have talked about satisfying this type of > need (in the context of ISSUE-7), by defining a framework for plugging > in user provided conversion functions without specifying the detailed > form which those plugins would take. My understanding is that RDB2RDF technologies shouldn't know *anything* about what's outside the database. This work should be done with other technologies, eg. rule engines. More generally, I don't think it's a good idea to put such things in RDB2RDF when we already have so many specs and technologies addressing these issues. My two cents, Alexandre. > > -David
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2011 15:10:40 UTC