Using csvw:Table in RDF output conflates a metadata definition table definition

[gkellogg]

Within the metadata, if a table has an @type it must be Table, which would expand to the same thing as csvw:Table. This indicates that an entity of type csvw:Table describes a Table Description.

However, in the CSV2RDF documentation, csvw:Table is also output as describing an instance of a mapped CSV. We should use a different term, possibly from a different namespace for types of mapped data vs metadata.

[6a6d74]

I had taken the @type statement in the metadata document to mean that the subject of the statements therein is the Table itself ... so the graph of those statements about the Table is the table description.

Thoughts?

[iherman]

I seem to remember we discussed this at the F2F... that the @type statements refer to the metadata and not the original data. In this sense we may not want to have those in the output. Ie, I am with @gkellogg on that one...

[6a6d74]

True- but I still think it's a live issue :-)

[danbri]

This hurts my head. Can we work from a real-world example? :)

[iherman]

The issue was briefly discussed on the F2F meeting on the 17 Dec 2014:

http://www.w3.org/2014/12/17-csvw-minutes.html#issue113

which seems to indicate that Jeremy may be right (except for the exact usage of the @id in the example of the metadata document).

In any case, the decision is not to touch this for the FPWD

[gkellogg]

Perhaps I was asleep at the wheel during that F2F meeting. If the metadata document is json-LD, and a node uses @type, that is the type of the node, which is for the metadata Table description. Using it as a template for the type of the table would be wrong.

It might be worth thinking about the metadata document as being RDF, in which case the @type: Table would expand to

[ a csvw:Table; ...]

Which is the triple which would be inferred anyway, based on the domain of some of its properties.

[iherman]

On 17 Dec 2014, at 17:08 , Gregg Kellogg notifications@github.com wrote:

Perhaps I was asleep at the wheel during that F2F meeting. If the metadata document is json-LD, and a node uses @type, that is the type of the node, which is for the metadata Table description. Using it as a template for the type of the table would be wrong.

The point Jeremy was making that the metadata also includes the '@id' (and it is required), set to the URI of the data! If so, then the @type actually refers to the data itself, which is then fine...

Ivan

It might be worth thinking about the metadata document as being RDF, in which case the @type: Table would expand to

[ a csvw:Table; ...]

Which is the triple which would be inferred anyway, based on the domain of some of its properties.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

---

Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704

[6a6d74]

@iherman: regarding the exact usage of @id in the metadata document, see ISSUE #93.

[JeniT]

Issue #93 has been resolved, so we're no longer using @id to refer to the CSV file as well as the table.

Let's work through a conversion example at the F2F to make sure that we're happy with this.

[JeniT]

Resolved at Feb F2F: an entity of type csvw:Table is a table (not a table description).