Use newly introduced ExpressionMap as domain for execution, return, and returnMap

[pmaria]

With the introduction of rml:ExpressionMap, the domain of rml:execution , rml:return, and rml:returnMap, should now be changed to rml:ExpressionMap.
This makes functions applicable on anything that is an rml:ExpressionMap , like rml:DatatypeMap, rml:LanguageMap etc.

[bjdmeest]

@pmaria are we supposed to call it 'function-valued expression map' then as well?

[bjdmeest]

Then the overall diagram would also change I assume

[pmaria]

yes, i think so

[bjdmeest]

@anaigmo

[anaigmo]

@pmaria are we supposed to call it 'function-valued expression map' then as well?

I'm confused by this statement, do you mean by this to introduce also a subclass of ExpressionMap called like that?

[bjdmeest]

We should be able to use a function when creating, e.g., the language tag, can you estimate how this affects the current diagram @anaigmo ? I would expect that all lines that currently go from FNML to TermMap as I see them at ontology/RML diagrams-RML-overview.png should actually go to ExpressionMap. But I could be wrong :)

[anaigmo]

Oki let's see; there are two options:

1. We go for ExpressionMap for everything: All terms that previously were subclass of TermMap, now they are of ExpressionMap

2. We only change the domains of returnMap, return and execution; leaving the rest with termMap

(Note that in the diagrams I'm not showing the shortcuts, but I take them into account for the OWL)

Please confirm which option makes more sense, and I'll change the corresponding resources

[bjdmeest]

The latter makes most sense imo, and is in line with what @pmaria said, so I vote for 2! :D

[samiscoding]

The second diagram makes more sense to me too!

[bjdmeest]

TODO @bjdmeest fix the spec wording

[bjdmeest]

So, this was already fixed 🙈