See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 06 September 2011
<scribe> scribenick: mhausenblas
PROPOSAL: Accept the minutes of last meeting http://www.w3.org/2011/08/30-rdb2rdf-minutes.html with the correction by David in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2011Aug/0185.html
RESOLUTION: Accept the minutes of last meeting http://www.w3.org/2011/08/30-rdb2rdf-minutes.html with the correction by David in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2011Aug/0185.html
<trackbot> ISSUE-61 -- Re-using public entity identifiers - look-up table -- pending review
<trackbot> ISSUE-66 -- Translation Scheme as proposed seems too complicated for the simple task of mapping <DB value(s), RDF term> -- open
<trackbot> ISSUE-29 -- Require blank node and IRI identifier expressions to produce strings -- pending review
David: Sec 11.5 - I don't understand what it means to use base64 encoding
<dmcneil> ericP - indeed :)
Michael: David, could you please ask Richard and the ML directly to resolve this?
David: Will do
<Ashok> When converting from SQL to XML binary data why do we need to convert to string first? Why not convert directly to base64?
<trackbot> ISSUE-48 -- Mapping SQL datatypes to RDF -- pending review
PROPOSAL: Close ISSUE-48 as it is addressed in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/#datatype-conversions
David: In fact my question was re ISSUE-48
PROPOSAL: Close ISSUE-29; all places that interpret SQL values as
string now use "conversion to string"
RESOLUTION: Close ISSUE-29; all places that interpret SQL values as string now use "conversion to string"
<trackbot> ISSUE-51 -- Handling of ill-typed literals -- pending review
PROPOSAL: Close ISSUE-51; the spec now demands that “supported RDF
types” MUST raise data error, and other types MAY raise data error
RESOLUTION: Close ISSUE-51; the spec now demands that “supported RDF types” MUST raise data error, and other types MAY raise data error
<trackbot> ISSUE-57 -- R2RML doesn't allow R2RML documents in RDF/XML syntax -- open
PROPOSAL: Lack of consensus on the syntax question is noted in the issue box in Section 4.2, which presents both options. A decision on the question will be postponed until after Last Call. This closes ISSUE-57.
Seema: We're working on the content of box
<MacTed> presuming there's an action tracking the ongoing work...
<dmcneil> (I emailed the list with my question concerning ISSUE-48)
RESOLUTION: Lack of consensus on the syntax question is noted in the issue box in Section 4.2, which presents both options. A decision on the question will be postponed until after Last Call. This closes ISSUE-57.
See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2011Aug/0150.html for details re ISSUES 54, 56, 59, and 60.
[[ PROPOSAL: Close ISSUES 54, 56, 59, 60; they are addressed in the latest draft.
David: I think some are more in-depth changes
<trackbot> ISSUE-59 -- Syntactic sugar for triples maps that only have a single predicate-object map -- pending review
Seema: I think ISSUE-59 should be left open
[[ PROPOSAL: Close ISSUES 54, 56, 60; they are addressed in the latest draft. ]]
<trackbot> ISSUE-54 -- Simpler constant-valued term maps -- pending review
David: Seems that the solution to ISSUE-54 changes the semantics of R2RML
Ivan: I think, maybe, if we have a 2nd LC round, last minute change should come not in a batch mail but separate
Michael: I agree
PROPOSAL: Close ISSUES 54, 56, 60; they are addressed in the latest draft.
RESOLUTION: Close ISSUES 54, 56, 60; they are addressed in the latest draft.
<trackbot> ISSUE-55 -- Nested predicate-object maps -- open
PROPOSAL: Postpone ISSUE-55, this could be considered for R2RML 1.1
<seema> +1 for postponing
RESOLUTION: Postpone ISSUE-55, this could be considered for R2RML 1.1
<trackbot> ISSUE-58 -- R2RML doesn't introduce Turtle well enough -- open
<Zakim> ericP, you wanted to say we can make purely editorial changes after LC
Eric: we can always point to the RDF WG Turtle doc, pure editorial changes are OK
PROPOSAL: Re-categorise ISSUE-58, it is an editorial/didactic issue and can be addressed after Last Call
<MacTed> oh, so we use British English? American is "categorize" :-)
RESOLUTION: Re-categorize ISSUE-58, it is an editorial/didactic issue and can be addressed after Last Call
<scribe> ACTION: Hausenblas to re-categorize ISSUE-58 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/06-RDB2RDF-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-157 - Re-categorize ISSUE-58 [on Michael Hausenblas - due 2011-09-13].
<trackbot> ISSUE-65 -- For uniformity and performance, "literal" triples must be always generated for each child table column in a foreign key -- open
PROPOSAL: For a foreign key of any arity, the reference property IRI is of the form <Table#ref-attr1-attr2-...-attrn>. This will address ISSUE-65
Juan: We went for 'ref' and '-' for the template
<ivan> +1 (it is as good as any scheme...)
Eric: both '-' and '.' are
... the downside of the dot is that it can confuse with the schema (DB/table) identifier
... the downside of the dash is that you'd need to escape the attribute value
<ericP> the dot variant
Eric: we can have both options in the DM document and ask for feedback
<MacTed> so this is an example -- pencil:_ <TaskAssignments#ref.project.deptName.deptCity> _:c .
<MacTed> vs -- pencil:_ <TaskAssignments#ref-project-deptName-deptCity> _:c .
<ericP> imo, <http://foo.example/Table/attr1=value1,attr2=value2> is intuitive
<ericP> <http://foo.example/Table/attr1.value1-attr2.value2> is easy to abbreviate with prefixes in turtle, SPARQL, RIF,...
(discussion on pro and cons of all the possible solutions)
Michael: how about <Table#ref,attr1,attr2,...,attrn> and <http://foo.example/Table/attr1=value1,attr2=value2>
<ericP> the ','s as separators has a pretty big cost in terms of expressing mapping rules
Ivan: I agree with Michael that asking others now is somehow complicated
Ashok: When I suggested asking SPARQL people I didn't mean the WG but people that have experience here
<ericP> <http://foo.example/Table/attr1.value1-attr2.value2> row identifier
<ericP> <http://foo.example/Table/attr1-attr2> reference predicate
<ericP> PREFIX inst: <http://foo.example/Table/> .
<ericP> PREFIX scheme: <http://foo.example/Table#> .
<ericP> inst:attr1.7-attr2.13 schema:fname "Bob" .
<scribe> ACTION: Eric to write up implications re dot vs. slash etc. for ISSUE-65 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/09/06-RDB2RDF-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-158 - Write up implications re dot vs. slash etc. for ISSUE-65 [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2011-09-13].
trackbot, end telecon
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Whewn/When/ Succeeded: s/catigorise/categorise/ Found ScribeNick: mhausenblas Inferring Scribes: mhausenblas Default Present: +1.314.394.aaaa, +3539149aabb, mhausenblas, dmcneil, Ashok_Malhotra, +575737aacc, juansequeda, +1.603.897.aadd, seema, nunolopes, EricP, Ivan, +1.512.484.aaee, +1.781.273.aaff, MacTed Present: +1.314.394.aaaa +3539149aabb mhausenblas dmcneil Ashok_Malhotra +575737aacc juansequeda +1.603.897.aadd seema nunolopes EricP Ivan +1.512.484.aaee +1.781.273.aaff MacTed Michael David Ashok Juan Seema Nuno Eric Ted Regrets: Richard Soeren Boris Marcelo Souri Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2011Sep/0000.html Found Date: 06 Sep 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/09/06-RDB2RDF-minutes.html People with action items: eric hausenblas[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]