Re: R2RML - SQL string representations

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>wrote:

> This is an argument for theoretical purity. The proposal has no
> significant benefit to users...
>

>From a user perspective it seems less surprising to have a set of options,
then one of those options is used by default. As opposed to having a set of
options plus a default behavior which lies outside of the available options.

(I guess the proposal would be to add a new rr:termType rr:PlainLiteral?)
>

Yes, something like that.

-David