Re: Formal objection to ISSUE-2 resolution

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>wrote
> How about stating explicitly that a conforming R2RML mapping document MUST
be in Turtle syntax?
> That makes it quite clear that a person who writes a mapping doc in
another RDF syntax is not within the standard.
> Would that address your concern?

Possibly/probably. I am curious what you see as the benefit of leaving in
the phrase:  "It *MAY* accept R2RML mapping
graphs<http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/#dfn-r2rml-mapping-graph>encoded
in other RDF syntaxes."?

-David