ISSUE-5: Default vs. direct mapping
ddmapping
Default vs. direct mapping
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- R2RML
- Raised by:
- Michael Hausenblas
- Opened on:
- 2010-10-26
- Description:
- There is an initial proposal for a direct graph [1] and a recent discussion on using default mapping [2]. The WG has to clarify, based on the input of the RDB2RDF Semantics Task Force, the usage in all documents (both, one, etc.).
The R2RML doc [3] should reference the definition of a direct graph/default mapping.
[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/directGraph/
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2010Oct/0083.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/ - Related Actions Items:
ACTION-77 on Michael Hausenblas to Create an issue for the default vs. direct mapping - due 2010-11-02, closed- Related emails:
- Re: RDB2RDF WG agenda for 2011-03-08 meeting 1700 UTC (from michael.hausenblas@deri.org on 2011-03-08)
- Re: RDB2RDF WG agenda for 2011-03-08 meeting 1700 UTC (from bertails@w3.org on 2011-03-07)
- RDB2RDF WG agenda for 2011-03-08 meeting 1700 UTC (from michael.hausenblas@deri.org on 2011-03-06)
- Minutes for the 2010-10-26 RDB2RDF meeting (from michael.hausenblas@deri.org on 2010-10-26)
- ISSUE-5 (ddmapping): Default vs. direct mapping [R2RML] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2010-10-26)
Related notes:
No additional notes.
Display change log
