Hi Rupert all, On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Rupert Westenthaler < rupert.westentha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All, Reto, > > Based your comment in this other discussion I reason that your are > working on updating Stanbol to the new Clerezza RDF api. > > This is to inform you that (without further discussion) I am -1 for > such an update. > The main reasoning behind this was the decision of Clerezza for NOT > using Apache Commons RDF (incubating) [1] as the RDF API for > Clerezza. Because of that we are now in a situation where we have +1 > competing Java RDF APIs (see http://xkcd.com/927/). > Sorry Rupert, stanbol is currently using clerezza, the clerezza 1.0.0 presents some significant simplifications and brings the API closer to the code in the incubating "commons rdf" project. Dismissing this clear improvements just because you think the clerezza community isn't willing enough to join standardization efforts seems to be both inappropriate and based on wrong premises. There NEVER was a decision of Clerezza not to use Apache Commons RDF. I have personally resigned from the incubating project [5] because the effort there seems in may eyes too much focused on real and presumed needs of triple stores and not enough on the standard and is unsuitable for several concrete use cases. > > Here is a Summary of the current situation as I see it: > > * Apache Commons RDF [1] is clearly not ready for production. > * It only recently released it first version of the API. > * We need to see how the adaption of this API is going. Especially > by the big two (Apache Jena [2] and Sesame [3]). See if Clerezza also > adapts Apache RDF commons somehow. > * We need to evaluate its API against the needs of the Stanbol > Enhancer (in-memory model, parsing, serializing) > * We need to evaluate how to use this API in OSGI, JAX-RS, ... > > * Apache Clerezza introduces a new Clerezza Commons RDF API > * The new Clerezza release (currently in voting) adapts this API > * This API is similar to the Apache Commons RDF API but AFAIK > incompatible > * The new API is incompatible with the old. Therefore code changes > are required in Stanbol after the update (esp. all EnhancementEngines > need to be adapted) > The clerezza commons RDF API which was released more than a month ago extracts some core part of clerezza API, does some minor adaptation to reflect the changes in RDF 1.1 and changes the name of types to be closer to the incubating commons RDF. This makes migration easier if the incubating proposal develops in a generic enough RDF API. A couple of days ago 77 clerezza modules that use the new commons-rdf API have been released, now there ia vore on releasing an updated RDF/JSON serializer and parser that was not part of the release. IMHO it is simple not possible to make any good decision between those > right now. If Apache Commons RDF gets adapted by both Sesame and Jena > it will probably be the better choice (esp. in the long turn). If not > updating to the most current Clerezza version could make more sense. > It might be that at some point adopting an Apache Commons RDF makes a lot of sense. However I don't see how this would be a reson to reject the patch I'm currently working on to use Clerezza 1.0.0 in stanbol (1.0.0). The patch will certainly not make a future change to another API harder but rather the opposite. > > What I want to avoid are two RDF API changes within a short period of > time. Such a change does not only require to adapt a lot of Apache > Stanbol implementations. As classes of the RDF API are also used in > central Stanbol Interfaces (most important the EnhancementEngine and > ContentItem interface) this also affects users with custom Stanbol > components. > In conclusion: > > Sticking with the current Clerezza versions for some additional time > (maybe a year) does not hurt. Doing so will allow for a much better > informed decision for the future RDF API for Apache Stanbol. > I'm not proposing a change for the 0.12 branch but I'm working on a patch for the 1.0.0 branch. Yes, the changes in the new Clerezza version are incompatible, even though many adaptation cabn be done by simple search and replace: s/UriRef/IRI/ s/TripleCollection/Graph/ It seems to be that dismissing this update would be to dismiss a clear improvement for something potentially even better to come. Changing to clerezza 1.0.0 does not make a future changes harder but quite the opposite. Cheers, Reto > > best > Rupert > > p.s. In a questionary for the best RDF API choice for Apache Stanbol I > would opt for the Sesame Model API [4]. As this in-memory model API is > a really great fit for the use case of the Stanbol Enhancer. > > [1] http://commonsrdf.incubator.apache.org/ > [2] https://jena.apache.org/ > [3] http://rdf4j.org/ > [4] > http://rdf4j.org/sesame/2.8/apidocs/org/openrdf/model/package-summary.html > [5] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/clerezza-dev/201505.mbox/%3CCALvhUEWOGJHmnzip7xNe7nTCwnd9JnjpEok%2B4Z%3DovzNKtgJavQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E > > > On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Reto Gmür <m...@farewellutopia.com> wrote: > > Ok, thanks for the prompt answers. For jsonld there currently is some > > outdated support in stanbol but not directly in clerezza. I will port > > rdf/json and try to have a release asap. > > > > Cheers, > > Reto > > On May 25, 2015 8:25 PM, "Ed - 0x1b, Inc." <e...@0x1b.com> wrote: > > > >> rdf/json. +1 > >> On May 25, 2015 9:37 AM, "Reto Gmür" <r...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > >> > Hello, > >> > > >> > There has been a major update in clerezza and many modules have been > >> > released as 1.0.0. > >> > > >> > Updating stanbol to the new clerezza artifacts I've noticed that > several > >> > modules include support for rdf/json. Howver the clerezzza bundle > >> > supporting this format has not been updated to use the new RDF > libraries. > >> > As I though nobody would be using this format anymore I wasn't > planning > >> to > >> > port it. > >> > > >> > > >> > So, does anybody still needs or uses rdf/json (application/rdf+json)? > >> > Otherwise I'l remove the support. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Reto > >> > > >> > > > > -- > | Rupert Westenthaler rupert.westentha...@gmail.com > | Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907 > | A-5500 Bischofshofen > | REDLINK.CO > .......................................................................... > | http://redlink.co/ >
