Re: Finalizing the duplicate-row-preservation proposal

On 21 May 2012, at 17:02, Boris Villazon-Terrazas wrote:
> P.S. this means I've to include new TCs for section 4.4 Default Mappings …. ;)

Well that's easy. The DM test suite, with the no-PK cases marked as SHOULD, can serve as a test suite for R2RML default mapping generators that produces a DM-based default mapping.

Best,
Richard


> 
> On May 18, 2012, at 11:15 PM, Marcelo Arenas wrote:
> 
>> +1
>> 
>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 9:52 AM, David McNeil <dmcneil@revelytix.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I've gone ahead and made a version of the R2RML ED with the proposed
>>>>> changes. This is of course not yet backed by a WG resolution, so it's all
>>>>> tentative. Diff here:
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/diffs/default-mapping.html
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The R2RML diff looks good to me.
>>>> 
>>>> -David
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Received on Monday, 21 May 2012 16:47:34 UTC