Closed bjdmeest closed 2 years ago
I was thinking exactly about the relation between SQL and the mapping in R2RML as you mentioned. Could be a way to solve it following a similar approach
https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11-api/#data-round-tripping might also be relevant
Do we already have any specifications in the case of having a list of output values? I think it falls more into the behavior of the engine but still makes sense to have the definition of the correct behavior.
Already got my answer! :D It's still an open issue in mapping-challenges. I think makes sense to specifically have an issue on that for rml-fno
just to be on the same page, you mean this challeng @samiscoding right?
https://github.com/kg-construct/mapping-challenges/tree/main/challenges/multivalue-references
just to be on the same page, you mean this challeng @samiscoding right?
https://github.com/kg-construct/mapping-challenges/tree/main/challenges/multivalue-references
Yes, but more specifically this challenge: https://github.com/kg-construct/mapping-challenges/tree/main/challenges/process-multivalue-reference
Given the text at https://kg-construct.github.io/fnml-spec/#fnml-outputtermmap , I close this comment with commit 6b412bc8cecc91e2c97728bda8af076a0d77d02e : everything not specific to the Output Term map is deferred to other parts of the spec.
A
fnml:FunctionMap
always returns an RDF term [[rdf-concepts]] or list thereof, thus already has things such as termtype, datatype, etc. defined. We probably want to allow to override these datatypes within an RML mapping. If so, do we need to specify how to override these datatypes? Are there standardized RDF coercion rules? Is this related to https://www.w3.org/TR/r2rml/#natural-mapping?