- From: RDB2RDF Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 16:38:58 +0000
- To: public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org
ISSUE-75 (tableName-sugar): Reconsider rr:tableName syntactic sugar [R2RML] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/75 Raised by: Richard Cyganiak On product: R2RML This is part of David's LC feedback, and it was also debated at the 2nd F2F. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Oct/0022.html Several questions were raised regarding the syntactic sugar that allows rr:tableName, rr:sqlQuery and rr:sqlVersion to be used not just on a logical table resource but also directly on a triples map. 1. Should we have this feature at all? 2. Should it use different property names (e.g., rr:logicalTableName and rr:logicalTable=>rr:name)? 3. Should it apply just to rr:tableName, or also to rr:sqlQuery and rr:sqlVersion? 4. The handling of this sugar in the B.2 table is non-obvious
Received on Monday, 7 November 2011 16:39:04 UTC