- From: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 16:18:46 -0400
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com, RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 20:53 +0100, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > Hi Alexandre, > > On 31 May 2011, at 20:27, Alexandre Bertails wrote: > >> I would agree to a proposal that maintains reversibility of the mapping by adding rdfs:domain triples to the properties, and does not generate triples for NULL values. > > > > I think that for the moment, we can agree on the current proposal > > without speaking about any concrete solution, which will come later when > > we're ready for it. > > No, because I'd like to know what I am agreeing to. I would likely be opposed to a solution that introduces a parliament of OWL into the direct mapping in order to work around the NULL issue. Oh well, I hope we don't need to use OWL at all :-) > > > rdfs:domain may be enough for this issue, but we may want other information as well. > > I think we all agree that rdfs:domain is *necessary*. > > I believe that it is also *sufficient* to reconstruct the NULLs, and have seen no claims to the contrary. > > So let's go with rdfs:domain *only* as the resolution to ISSUE-42. > > More schema triples may still be added to the direct mapping later on, but that needs to be discussed, and it can't be discussed before there's a proposal on the table. So I suggest treating additional schema triples as a different and separate issue (which someone should create in the tracker). I totally agree on the fact we can act triples later. But I just want to point out the fact that we may have to change this solution later (for consistency issue for example). > > PROPOSAL: Resolve ISSUE-42 by not creating triples for NULL values, and adding rdfs:domain statements to the direct mapping graph. This does not preclude adding more schema triples in a future resolution. Because I also like to know what I am agreeing to, can I ask you to produce a real example involving the use of rdfs:domain? Alexandre. > > Best, > Richard
Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2011 20:18:53 UTC