New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Review the "deviation from the charter" page #503
Comments
A couple of notes: In CSV case with simple metadata, you use This might also provide an example of using SPARQL as a transformation. In example2, I faked the "ref" column to use a
The script at
It might be better as an UPDATE, but would need a more explicit reference to the graph. As a CONSTRUCT, it probably also needs to wild-card all other triples to reflect them in the result. |
Gregg, can you change the wiki page? You are right about the usage of _row... Thanks. As for the usage of SPARQL: yes, maybe it is worth making a note that the output could be changed in a second pass on the data; but that is not really relevant for the charter issue... Thanks! Ivan Ivan Herman (Written on mobile, sorry for brevity and misspellings...)
|
The word "abandoned" is a little harsh. "Is not being proposed for the REC We should be careful that we do not undermine perceptions of R2RML's value. On 17 April 2015 at 13:12, Ivan Herman notifications@github.com wrote:
|
Dan, that is fine. Will you update the wiki page? Otherwise I will do it sometimes the week end Thanks Ivan Ivan Herman (Written on mobile, sorry for brevity and misspellings...)
|
I updated the metadata, and the form of the properties created in the expect output (e.g., In the next round, it may be worth adding examples to the Transformations Definitions using these examples, and something like the SPARQL I used to show how the transformation might work. As it stands, there are no examples of templates. |
On 17 April 2015 at 19:26, Ivan Herman notifications@github.com wrote:
Done |
I have prepared a wiki page on the subject, concentrating mostly on the relationship to the Direct Mapping and R2RML (see also #455). This topic (ie, document) will be necessary when we go for the LCCR transition).
A review from all of you would be good, closing the issue when everybody is happy...
/Cc @JeniT @gkellogg @danbri @6a6d74
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: