@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix edu: <https://knobit.org/def/> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix schema: <https://schema.org/> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .

<https://knobit.org/id/task/ddl-review/C1> a edu:Question ;
    rdfs:label "C1 (3 points)"@en ;
    dcterms:license <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/> ;
    owl:sameAs <https://bitbucket.org/reffa/ontology/id/task/ddl-review/C1> ;
    schema:hasPart <https://knobit.org/id/register/data-modelling#I-801>,
        <https://knobit.org/id/register/data-modelling#I-802> ;
    schema:identifier "C1" ;
    schema:position 1 ;
    schema:text "The DDL is output, not source, 1 point each: (a) no finding's fix is an edit to the .sql - every one routes to the model, the config, a DQ rule or the deployment, and none says to change the SQL by hand; (b) ck_application_amount_positive is in the Postgres SQL and in no part of the model, so it is identified as an object regeneration would destroy and moved into the model; (c) ix_fct_application_status appears in both files and in no part of the model, so it is identified the same way - and the answer does not treat it as a design question about indexing."@en .

edu:Question rdfs:label "Question"@en,
        "Küsimus"@et .

<https://knobit.org/id/register/data-modelling#I-801> rdfs:label "ddl-review C1a and Q1b: fixes routed upstream, no hand edits"@en .

<https://knobit.org/id/register/data-modelling#I-802> rdfs:label "ddl-review C1b and C1c: objects in the SQL and not in the model"@en .