Re: Review of the the DM pre CR version (Re: Final round of Direct Mapping spec changes; please review to prepare for CR)

Ivan,

I've addressed your comments:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/directMapping/LC/Overview.html

Comments in-line


On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 6:27 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:

> Juan, Eric, Alexandre,
>
> there are some editorial issues for all three of you below:-)
>
> (B.t.w, It is a little bit disturbing that the date still says 20
> September 2011 and the copyright statement is set to 2010... (The latter
> should be changed before publication...). The CVS log made it clear at the
> end of the document that I am looking at the right document:-))
>
>
I'll leave this to Eric


>
> - I think that for a final review leading to the CR, we should also see
> the Status of Document session. Or is it so that the Status will only be
> the boilerplate text for a CR generated by the tools you use for the
> publication? (I would expect that to be the case, but we should know...)
>
>
I'll leave this to Eric


> - First sentence in Section 2. This is really just being knit-picking, and
> not being a relational database expert: is 'SQL Database' the right term?
> My understanding is that there is a notion of a Relational Database, and
> SQL is a query/definition language thereof.
>

Fine by me. R2RML uses the term "relational database". We should be
consistent, so I changed it.



> - Section 2.1.
>
>  SQL example, first table creation: "ID' -> "ID" (double vs. single quote)
>

Done

>
>  Again my SQL knowledge... at the last telco we decided to put a quote
> around identifier to get around the character casing problem. Shouldn't ID
> be in quotes in the argument of PRIMARY KEY(ID) as well (note that the same
> statement is quoted in the text after the SQL portion where ID is in
> quotes)? The same question for the INSERT statements.
>
>
Also added missing quotes in another example.

Not sure about the INSERT statements... somebody?


>  Also, is it intentional that sometimes single and sometimes double quotes
> are used? If the two are interchangeable, I would propose to be consistent
> within the examples
>

I only see single quotes in the INSERT statements. Can somebody confirm if
this is ok?

>
>  There is '.' missing after the @base statements in the Turtle example in
> 2.1
>

Done

>
>  The last paragraph of the section says:
>
>  [[[
>  note however that it is not known how to relate the behaviour of the
> obtained RDF
>  graph with the standard SQL semantics of the NULL values of the source
> RDB. For
>  a detailed discussion of this issue, see a forthcoming working group note.
>  ]]]
>
>  Is this note really forthcoming? At the moment, we do not know whether it
> will happen. I guess it would be safer not to have a reference to a
> publication that may not materialize, ie, just remove the last sentence.
>

This is a note that I have planned to write with Marcelo. Remember the
hundreds of emails on this topic... if I recall, the resolution was to add
those two sentences to the spec. Michael, can you confirm?

>
> - Section 2.2
>
>   SQL example, the PRIMARY KEY(ID) appears (without quotes) in the second
> creation statement and with quotes in the first...
>

Done

>
>   The '.' is missing after @base in the Turtle example.
>

Done

>
>   There is a superfluous ';' character in the Turtle example:
> <Department/ID-23> <Department#manager> 8; .
>

Done


>
> - Section 2.5
>
>   SQL example: is there a reason for the tabulation that puts everything
> but "lead" and "worker" on a deeper level? I guess this is and editorial bug
>
>   I had difficulties understanding the example here. First of all, it may
> be worth to make it clear that this example refers back to the example in
> Section 2.2. But the slightly convoluted nature of unique keys, the fact
> that they overlap (see the table) makes it a little bit difficult to follow.
>
>   I wonder whether it would not help to remove the references to the
> Department table (at least from TaskAssignments). It does not bring
> anything at this point to the user, just creates confusion...
>

I'll leave this to Eric


> A.4 Denotational semantics, using the set-notation, rules [36] and [38]:
>
>     [36] says:
>
>     IRI(UE(R.name) + "/ref-" + (join('.', UE(A.name) + "-" + UE(A.value))
> ∣ A ∈ As ))
>
>   is this correct? This rule establishes the URI for a row, but that
> should not include the 'ref-' string. That is for the reference predicate...
>
>     On the other hand, shouldn't the '#ref-' appear in rule [38] instead?
> Note that the English description of that rule misses the reference to
> '#ref-', too.
>
>    The same errors seem to appear in the set-builder notation, too.
>

I'll leave this to Eric


>
> B. Rules, General remark: I am not sure what is happening, but the fonts
> used in the formulae in this appendix seem to be different than the ones in
> the informative section or Appendix A. I am getting old, but I find the
> formulae much less readable as a result than in the previous sections.
>

You are right. The font was smaller. I increased it

>
> B. Rules, B.2, generating Literal Triples:
>
>    Is there a missing a rule predicate that accounts for the
> transformation of a cell value into a possibly typed literal value? The way
> I read the rules in B.2.1 and B.2.2 is that the cell value is taken
> verbatim as the object of the literal triples which does not seem to be
> correct. Maybe I miss something, in which case an explanation in the text
> may be a good idea...
>

Thanks for finding this :)

We added a built in predicate generateTypedLiteral

>
> Thanks for all the work!
>
> Ivan
>
> On Jan 20, 2012, at 17:33 , Juan Sequeda wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > On behalf of the editors, we believe that the Direct Mapping it is ready
> for CR.
> >
> > The current Editor's draft can be found:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/directMapping/LC/Overview.html
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Juan Sequeda
> > +1-575-SEQ-UEDA
> > www.juansequeda.com
>
>
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
>
>
>
>
>