- From: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:17:00 +0200
- To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Cc: RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 21 Jun 2011, at 11:53, Michael Hausenblas wrote: >> This set to be supported SHOULD be as complete as possible and be defined as soon as possible after the WG official launch. > > Is the important part. And I think we have a resolution on this now. I personally wouldn't worry about this but I'm happy to take a rewording on board. Tracker this is my ACTION-117. "SHOULD be as complete as possible" means that my proposal to translate the NULLs as constants was more complete than the approved proposal not translating the NULLs. Note that I am not asking to revise the decision which somehow makes most people happy, but I note the inconsistency wrt the charter. > Can you please propose a concrete wording for the charter update? We are working on it with Juan. cheers --e. > > > Cheers, > Michael > -- > Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow > LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre > DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute > NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway > Ireland, Europe > Tel. +353 91 495730 > http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ > http://sw-app.org/about.html > > On 21 Jun 2011, at 09:59, Enrico Franconi wrote: > >> Folks, I reread the charter today, and the first two bullets are: >> >> • The mapping language MUST define the mapping of relational data and relational schemas to RDF and OWL. >> >> • The mapping language MUST define the set of relational algebra to be supported in the first release. This set to be supported SHOULD be as complete as possible and be defined as soon as possible after the WG official launch. >> >> How does the latter "MUST" relate to our discussion on NULL values? Can we map relational data with NULL values and at the same time can we not provide support on how to properly access this data in RDF? >> --e. > >
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2011 18:17:30 UTC