afs commented on issue #1470: URL: https://github.com/apache/jena/issues/1470#issuecomment-1207231881
> How does the iri4ld implementation differ from jena's current default one functionality-wise? Javadoc has the operations described: https://github.com/afs/x4ld/blob/main/iri4ld/src/main/java/org/seaborne/rfc3986/RFC3986.java An Jena IRIProvider: https://gist.github.com/afs/a0bf740d1bd1fde283eabeab8b4ddb67 It is a java-coded parser for RFC 3986. The parser is a single file (`IRI3986`), written with efficiency in-mind. No sub-parsers or tokenizers. jena-iri is a general system for IRIs. It is complicated to build. iri4ld simple to build and provides the operations needed for linked data. Like jena-iri, it is independent of the Jena RDF codebase. iri4ld has less in the the way of extras not used by Jena. The parser is IRI3986.java - all URIs (except it works in Java unicode strings so RFC 3987). It has some additional scheme specific rule support for the common schemes: it covers "http:", "https:", "did:", "file:" "urn:uuid:", "urn:", "uuid:" (which is not official) and "example:" (RFC 7595). -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
