- From: ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 08:37:11 -0800
- To: Sören Auer <auer@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
- CC: public-xg-rdb2rdf <public-xg-rdb2rdf@w3.org>
Thanks, Soeren, I will find that. Your changes look good to me. All the best, Ashok Sören Auer wrote: > ashok malhotra wrote: >> I think we are done! >> I have placed a revised version of the proposed charter at >> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/rdb2rdf/WG-draft-charter/Overview.html >> >> This contains minor changes as recommended by the SWCG on last >> Friday's call. >> Please take a look. It doesn't display quite correctly for me. If >> you have problems also >> please reply and I will try and fix it. > > The wired look is due to the incorrect references to CSS stylesheets > and images in the head of the HTML page. I fixed that as well as a > number of typos in the attached version - just upload it and > everything should show up fine ;-) > > I also replaced "simple" in "simple applications such as Web 2.0 > applications" with "lightweight", which fits better from my point of > view and capitalized MUST in "language must be able to expose vendor > specific SQL features". I also added a link to www.linkeddata.org in > "3.2 External Groups". > > Cheers, > > Sören > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > * Scope <#scope> > * Deliverables <#deliverables> > * Dependencies <#coordination> > * Participation <#participation> > * Communication <#communication> > * Decision Policy <#decisions> > * Patent Policy <#patentpolicy> > * About this Charter <#about> > > W3C <http://www.w3.org/> Technology and Society Domain > <http://www.w3.org/TandS/> > > > RDB2RDF Working Group Charter > > *Revised February 24, 2009* > > In the last few years there has been increasing interest in mapping > Relational data to the Semantic Web. This is to allow Relational data > to be combined with other data on the Web, to add semantics to > Relational data and to aid in enterprise data integration. In October > 2007, the W3C organized a workshop on RDF Access to Relational > Databases <http://www.w3.org/2007/03/RdfRDB/report>. This led to the > formation of the RDB2RDF Incubator Group > <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/rdb2rdf/> to explore the area. This > Incubator Group recently concluded its work and produced two > deliverables: a Survey of the State of the Art > <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/rdb2rdf/RDB2RDF_SurveyReport.pdf> > and a RDB2RDF XG Final Report > <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/rdb2rdf/XGR/>. The RDB2RDF XG Final > Report. <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/rdb2rdf/XGR/> recommends > that the W3C initiate a Working Group to standardize a language for > mapping Relational database schemas to RDF and OWL. This charter is a > follow-up to that recommendation. > > Consequently, the *mission* of the RDB2RDF Working Group, part of the > Semantic Web Activity <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/>, is to standardize > a language for mapping Relational Database schemas into RDF and OWL: > the RDB2RDF Mapping Language (R2RML). > > The mapping language defined by the WG would facilitate the > development of several types of products. It could be used to > translate Relational data into RDF which could be stored in a triple > store. This is sometimes called Extract-Transform-Load (ETL). Or it > could be used to generate a virtual mapping that could be queried > using SPARQL and the SPARQL translated to SQL queries on the > underlying Relational data. Other products could be layered on top of > these capabilities to query and deliver data in different ways as well > as to integrate the data with other kinds of information on the > Semantic Web. The RDB2RDF XG Final Report > <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/rdb2rdf/XGR/> includes several > detailed usecases that motivate the mapping language. > > Join the RDB2RDF Working Group. > > End date 30 June 2011 (two years from inception) > Confidentiality Proceedings are public > <http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/comm.html#confidentiality-levels> > > Initial Chairs CHAIR INFO > Initial Team Contacts > (FTE %: 5 to 10) TEAM CONTACT INFO > Usual Meeting Schedule Teleconferences: Weekly > Face-to-face: 3-4 per year > > > Scope > > Based on the Survey of Current Approaches for Mapping of Relational > Databases to RDF > <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/rdb2rdf/RDB2RDF_SurveyReport.pdf> > prepared by the RDB2RDF XG and the RDB2RDF XG Final Report > <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/rdb2rdf/XGR/> the scope of R2RML is > defined as follows: > > * The mapping language MUST define the mapping of Relational > schemas to RDF and OWL. > * The mapping language SHOULD be complete with regard to the > Relational algebra, i.e. all Relational constructs SHOULD be > expressible in the language. > * The mapping language SHOULD have a human-readable syntax as well > as XML and RDF representations of the syntax for purposes of > discovery and machine generation. > * The mapping language SHOULD be expressed in rules as defined by > the W3C RIF WG > <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group>. The > syntax need not follow the RIF syntax but there SHOULD exist a > round-tripable transformation between the mapping language and > an RIF dialect. > * It SHOULD be possible to subset the mapping language for > lightweight applications such as Web 2.0 applications. This > feature of the language will be validated by creating a library > of mappings for widely used applications such as Drupal, > Wordpress and phpBB. > * The mapping language MUST allow customization with regard to > names and data transformation. In addition the language MUST > allow the addition of rules and RDF constraints as part of the > mapping. > * The language must be able to expose vendor specific SQL features > such as full-text and spatial support and vendor-defined datatypes. > * The mapping language specification SHOULD include guidance with > regard to mapping Relational data to a subset of OWL such as > OWL/QL or OWL/RL. > * The mapping language MUST allow for a mechanism to create > identifiers for database entities. The generation of identifiers > should be designed to support the implementation of the linked > data principles > <http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html>. Where > possible, the language will encourage the reuse of public > identifiers for long-lived entities such as persons, > corporations and geo-locations. > > The Survey of the State of the Art > <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/rdb2rdf/RDB2RDF_SurveyReport.pdf> > describes several languages and implementations that may be used as > starting points for the work of the WG. > > > Success Criteria > > * Timely preparation of the deliverables. See below. > * At least two conforming implementations of the mapping language, > perhaps embedded into products that provide additional > functionality. > > > Out of Scope > > * Mapping from non-Relational data to RDF and OWL. > * Updating the Relational Database based on changes to the RDF or OWL. > > > Deliverables > > * A specification for a language to map Relational schemas to RDF > and OWL as a W3C Recommendation. > * A set of test cases to test conformance. > > [Recommended information] > > > Other Deliverables > > [Replace this text] Describe any other deliverables such as test > suites, tools, or reviews of other groups' deliverables. > > > Milestones > > [Replace this text] Specification transition estimates and other > milestones > > Milestones Note: The group will document significant changes from this > initial schedule on the group home page. > Specification FPWD LC CR PR Rec > FooML Month YYYY Month YYYY Month YYYY Month YYYY Month YYYY > BarML Month YYYY Month YYYY Month YYYY Month YYYY Month YYYY > > [Recommended information] > > > Timeline View Summary > > [Replace this text] Put here a timeline view of *all deliverables*. > > * Month YYYY: First teleconference > * Month YYYY: First face-to-face meeting > * Month YYYY: Requirements and Use Cases for the RDB2RDF Mapping > Language (R2RML) > * Month YYYY: First Public Working Draft for R2RML > * Month YYYY: First Public Working Draft R2RML Primer > * Month YYYY: R2RML Test Cases > * Month YYYY: R2RML Syntax > > > Dependencies > > > W3C Groups > > SPARQL Working Group (DAWG) <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/> > Track the evolution of SPARQL (updates, etc.). > RIF WG <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group> > Define a dialect of RIF for the mapping language. > OWL WG <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/OWL_Working_Group> > Track the evolution of OWL2. > > Furthermore, RDB2RDF Working Group expects to follow these W3C > Recommendations: > > * QA Framework: Specification Guidelines > <http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/>. > * Character Model for the World Wide Web 1.0: Fundamentals > <http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/> > * Architecture of the World Wide Web, Volume I > <http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/> > > > External Groups > > Linked Data community <http://linkeddata.org/> > To support the implementation of the linked data principles. > The OKKAM Project <http://www.okkam.org/> > The ENS System for assigning reusable identifiers to people, > locations, organizations, events, products, etc. > Neuro Commons Common Naming Project > <http://neurocommons.org/page/Common_Naming_Project> > Reusable identifiers for life sciences entities. > Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group > <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/hcls/> > Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group > > > Participation > > To be successful, the RDB2RDF Working Group is expected to have 5 or > more active participants for its duration. Effective participation to > RDB2RDF Working Group is expected to consume one work day per week for > each participant; two days per week for editors. The RDB2RDF Working > Group will allocate also the necessary resources for building Test > Suites for each specification. > > Participants are reminded of the Good Standing requirements > <http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups.html#good-standing> > of the W3C Process. > > > Communication > > This group primarily conducts its work on the public mailing list LIST > NAME. [Replace this text] Provide information about additional > Member-only lists that are used for administrative purposes. > > Information about the group (deliverables, participants, face-to-face > meetings, teleconferences, etc.) is available from the RDB2RDF Working > Group home page. > > > Decision Policy > > As explained in the Process Document (section 3.3 > <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/policies#Consensus>), this group > will seek to make decisions when there is consensus. When the Chair > puts a question and observes dissent, after due consideration of > different opinions, the Chair should record a decision (possibly after > a formal vote) and any objections, and move on. > > * When deciding a substantive technical issue, the Chair may put a > question before the group. The Chair must only do so during a > group meeting > <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/policies.html#GeneralMeetings>, > and at least two-thirds of participants in Good Standing > <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/groups.html#good-standing> > must be in attendance. When the Chair conducts a formal vote > <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/policies#Votes> to reach a > decision on a substantive technical issue, eligible voters may > vote on a proposal one of three ways: for a proposal, against a > proposal, or abstain. For the proposal to pass there must be > more votes for the proposal than against. In case of a tie, the > Chair will decide the outcome of the proposal. > * This charter is written in accordance with Section 3.4, Votes > <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/policies#Votes> of the W3C > Process Document and includes no voting procedures beyond what > the Process Document requires. > > > Patent Policy > > This Working Group operates under the W3C Patent Policy > <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/> (5 February > 2004 Version). To promote the widest adoption of Web standards, W3C > seeks to issue Recommendations that can be implemented, according to > this policy, on a Royalty-Free basis. > > For more information about disclosure obligations for this group, > please see the W3C Patent Policy Implementation > <http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/>. > > > About this Charter > > This charter for the RDB2RDF Working Group has been created according > to section 6.2 <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/groups#GAGeneral> > of the Process Document <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process>. In the > event of a conflict between this document or the provisions of any > charter and the W3C Process, the W3C Process shall take precedence. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Ashok Malhotra (Oracle), Michel Hausenblas (DERI) > > Copyright <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Copyright>© > 2009 W3C <http://www.w3.org/> ^® (MIT <http://www.csail.mit.edu/> , > ERCIM <http://www.ercim.org/> , Keio <http://www.keio.ac.jp/>), All > Rights Reserved. > > $Date: 2009/02/24 14:48:16 $ >
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 2009 16:39:18 UTC