[jira] [Commented] (JENA-1606) add OpenAnnotation and ActivityStream vocabulary
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1606?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16631101#comment-16631101 ] Andy Seaborne commented on JENA-1606: - Seems like a good idea - presumably these vocabularies aren't likely to change in the next, say, 5 years. > add OpenAnnotation and ActivityStream vocabulary > > > Key: JENA-1606 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1606 > Project: Apache Jena > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Core >Reporter: Elie Roux >Priority: Minor > > I've created vocabulary classes for OA (Open Annotation) and AS (Activity > Stream) vocabulary, both are used in Web annotations. They're in > [https://github.com/BuddhistDigitalResourceCenter/lds-pdi/tree/master/src/main/java/io/bdrc/ldspdi/annotations] > I can open a pull request if desired. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (JENA-1595) Move log4j into scope test in the parent POM
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16630731#comment-16630731 ] ASF subversion and git services commented on JENA-1595: --- Commit 87e70b05144d2863b2de116e72f8c1607d02c6b2 in jena's branch refs/heads/master from [~an...@apache.org] [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=jena.git;h=87e70b0 ] JENA-1595: Require log4j for cmds and distribution > Move log4j into scope test in the parent POM > > > Key: JENA-1595 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1595 > Project: Apache Jena > Issue Type: Task > Components: Build >Affects Versions: Jena 3.8.0 >Reporter: Andy Seaborne >Assignee: Andy Seaborne >Priority: Minor > Fix For: Jena 3.9.0 > > > Having dependencies in the parent POM restricts the ability to exclude them. > Many of the modules rely on log4j for testing. > Changing the parent dependency to scope-test provides a way to catch all uses > in testing. > This is a step towards refactoring logging. > > > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
Re: Towards Jena 3.9.0
FYI First attempt didn't work out. The apache-jena/lib/ didn't have slf4j-log4j or log4j jar files. This is because these are now "true" in the parent (JENA-1595) so apache-jena (the distribution) does not pick them up. They ought to be not-optional in jena-cmds which does need a definite choice of logging so it can ensure it is initialized. The Fuseki module and package changes did work in RDF Delta. It is change; I don't know of anyone who depends on them as deeply as this code does although part of the reason for the changes is to enable better extensibility; RDF Delta is not special. Andy On 27/09/18 11:37, ajs6f wrote: +1 ajs6f On Sep 27, 2018, at 6:14 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote: I'm going to start the 3.9.0 release process. Andy
[jira] [Commented] (JENA-1608) different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - solved in
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16630471#comment-16630471 ] andrew u frank commented on JENA-1608: -- I am sorry to have assumed that the playground would be "correct" - the specifiations are VERY different to read . the 1.1 version seems to improve, but it does not print ok and I need paper to make the connections between parts of the specification and to get their meaning and the intentions behind the rules. i understand that the jena with json-ld 1.1 will be late 2020? reading the document 1.0 I do not see what is normative, except for the grammar, which does not explain what effect the elements have; the description of what it means is all in the non-normative sections. specifically, i can not immediately see (normative) what effect the presence or absence of the @base or @vocab entry has. I see that I have to check the API document, where a long list of if .. sentences gives the definition. I can understand the intention, but it calls for more detailed non-normative explanations. difficult... thank you for all the work - I appreciate your efforts and the very useful result! andrew > different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - > solved in > --- > > Key: JENA-1608 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608 > Project: Apache Jena > Issue Type: Bug > Components: RIOT >Affects Versions: Jena 3.6.0, Jena 3.8.0 >Reporter: andrew u frank >Priority: Minor > Labels: newbie > Attachments: problem.jsonld, problem.ttl, > problem_output_playground.txt > > > I have the json-ld document [^problem.jsonld] processed on the json-ld > playground (which I assume is authoritative) and get the result > [^problem_output_playground.txt]. if I process the same file with RIOT the > result is different, namely [^problem.ttl]. > The difference is simply that RIOT does not include the rdf-objects which are > not using a blank node as identifier. If a line > "@base": "http://gerastree.at/lit_2014#" > is added to the context, the output seems to conform to what is produced by > the playground. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
Re: Towards Jena 3.9.0
+1 ajs6f > On Sep 27, 2018, at 6:14 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > I'm going to start the 3.9.0 release process. > >Andy
[jira] [Commented] (JENA-1608) different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - solved in
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16630152#comment-16630152 ] A. Soroka commented on JENA-1608: - The JSON-LD playground is _not_ authoritative (although of course it is extremely useful). The specifications are, and Jena relies on [json-ld-java|https://github.com/jsonld-java/jsonld-java] to implement them. We can check to see if there is an error here or in how Jena is moving information to json-ld-java, but the code that is generating JSON-LD is not part of Jena's codebase so there may be a limited amount we can do. > different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - > solved in > --- > > Key: JENA-1608 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608 > Project: Apache Jena > Issue Type: Bug > Components: RIOT >Affects Versions: Jena 3.6.0, Jena 3.8.0 >Reporter: andrew u frank >Priority: Minor > Labels: newbie > Attachments: problem.jsonld, problem.ttl, > problem_output_playground.txt > > > I have the json-ld document [^problem.jsonld] processed on the json-ld > playground (which I assume is authoritative) and get the result > [^problem_output_playground.txt]. if I process the same file with RIOT the > result is different, namely [^problem.ttl]. > The difference is simply that RIOT does not include the rdf-objects which are > not using a blank node as identifier. If a line > "@base": "http://gerastree.at/lit_2014#" > is added to the context, the output seems to conform to what is produced by > the playground. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (JENA-1608) different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - solved in
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16630147#comment-16630147 ] A. Soroka commented on JENA-1608: - Not before JSON-LD 1.1. is actually released as a W3C recommendation: [https://www.w3.org/2018/03/jsonld-wg-charter.html] I am a Jena committer and a member of that working group, so Jena is fully apprised of what is happening there. > different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - > solved in > --- > > Key: JENA-1608 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608 > Project: Apache Jena > Issue Type: Bug > Components: RIOT >Affects Versions: Jena 3.6.0, Jena 3.8.0 >Reporter: andrew u frank >Priority: Minor > Labels: newbie > Attachments: problem.jsonld, problem.ttl, > problem_output_playground.txt > > > I have the json-ld document [^problem.jsonld] processed on the json-ld > playground (which I assume is authoritative) and get the result > [^problem_output_playground.txt]. if I process the same file with RIOT the > result is different, namely [^problem.ttl]. > The difference is simply that RIOT does not include the rdf-objects which are > not using a blank node as identifier. If a line > "@base": "http://gerastree.at/lit_2014#" > is added to the context, the output seems to conform to what is produced by > the playground. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
Re: Towards Jena 3.9.0
I'm going to start the 3.9.0 release process. Andy
[jira] [Comment Edited] (JENA-1608) different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - solved in
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16630068#comment-16630068 ] andrew u frank edited comment on JENA-1608 at 9/27/18 9:45 AM: --- I found that the problem is not solved in 3.8.0. thank you for json-ld support! any plans to switch to json-ld 1.1? was (Author: andrewufrank): I found that the problem is solved in 3.8.0 - sorry to bother and thank you for json-ld support! any plans to switch to json-ld 1.1? > different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - > solved in > --- > > Key: JENA-1608 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608 > Project: Apache Jena > Issue Type: Bug > Components: RIOT >Affects Versions: Jena 3.6.0, Jena 3.8.0 >Reporter: andrew u frank >Priority: Minor > Labels: newbie > Attachments: problem.jsonld, problem.ttl, > problem_output_playground.txt > > > I have the json-ld document [^problem.jsonld] processed on the json-ld > playground (which I assume is authoritative) and get the result > [^problem_output_playground.txt]. if I process the same file with RIOT the > result is different, namely [^problem.ttl]. > The difference is simply that RIOT does not include the rdf-objects which are > not using a blank node as identifier. If a line > "@base": "http://gerastree.at/lit_2014#" > is added to the context, the output seems to conform to what is produced by > the playground. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Updated] (JENA-1608) different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - solved in
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] andrew u frank updated JENA-1608: - Affects Version/s: Jena 3.8.0 Summary: different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - solved in (was: different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot) > different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot - > solved in > --- > > Key: JENA-1608 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608 > Project: Apache Jena > Issue Type: Bug > Components: RIOT >Affects Versions: Jena 3.6.0, Jena 3.8.0 >Reporter: andrew u frank >Priority: Minor > Labels: newbie > Attachments: problem.jsonld, problem.ttl, > problem_output_playground.txt > > > I have the json-ld document [^problem.jsonld] processed on the json-ld > playground (which I assume is authoritative) and get the result > [^problem_output_playground.txt]. if I process the same file with RIOT the > result is different, namely [^problem.ttl]. > The difference is simply that RIOT does not include the rdf-objects which are > not using a blank node as identifier. If a line > "@base": "http://gerastree.at/lit_2014#" > is added to the context, the output seems to conform to what is produced by > the playground. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (JENA-1608) different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16630068#comment-16630068 ] andrew u frank commented on JENA-1608: -- I found that the problem is solved in 3.8.0 - sorry to bother and thank you for json-ld support! any plans to switch to json-ld 1.1? > different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot > -- > > Key: JENA-1608 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608 > Project: Apache Jena > Issue Type: Bug > Components: RIOT >Affects Versions: Jena 3.6.0 >Reporter: andrew u frank >Priority: Minor > Labels: newbie > Attachments: problem.jsonld, problem.ttl, > problem_output_playground.txt > > > I have the json-ld document [^problem.jsonld] processed on the json-ld > playground (which I assume is authoritative) and get the result > [^problem_output_playground.txt]. if I process the same file with RIOT the > result is different, namely [^problem.ttl]. > The difference is simply that RIOT does not include the rdf-objects which are > not using a blank node as identifier. If a line > "@base": "http://gerastree.at/lit_2014#" > is added to the context, the output seems to conform to what is produced by > the playground. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Created] (JENA-1608) different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot
andrew u frank created JENA-1608: Summary: different output when processing json-ld in the playground and in riot Key: JENA-1608 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1608 Project: Apache Jena Issue Type: Bug Components: RIOT Affects Versions: Jena 3.6.0 Reporter: andrew u frank Attachments: problem.jsonld, problem.ttl, problem_output_playground.txt I have the json-ld document [^problem.jsonld] processed on the json-ld playground (which I assume is authoritative) and get the result [^problem_output_playground.txt]. if I process the same file with RIOT the result is different, namely [^problem.ttl]. The difference is simply that RIOT does not include the rdf-objects which are not using a blank node as identifier. If a line "@base": "http://gerastree.at/lit_2014#" is added to the context, the output seems to conform to what is produced by the playground. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
