Re: SHACLC and RDFLanguages
I was looking into this again... I see that RDFParserRegistry already
has the required collections langTriples and langQuads.
I think simply adding accessors for them would solve my use case.
Something like this maybe?
public static Set registeredLangTriples()
{
return Collections.unmodifiableSet(langTriples);
}
public static Set registeredLangQuads()
{
return Collections.unmodifiableSet(langQuads);
}
I don't see a similar collection under ResultSetReaderRegistry though?
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 6:04 PM Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
> PRs welcome.
>
> On 23/05/2022 08:51, Martynas Jusevičius wrote:
> > Could RDFParserRegistry::getRegistered and
> > ResultSetReaderRegistry::getRegistered be added?
>
> Consistent naming would be registered().
>
> Andy
>
> > On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 9:01 PM Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 20/05/2022 14:05, Martynas Jusevičius wrote:
> >>> Andy, is that correct?
> >>
> >> Yes
> >>
> >> Andy
> >>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:33 PM Martynas Jusevičius
> >>> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:19 PM Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >
> > RDFLanguages is a general registry of names (Lang's) in the system.
> >
> > It is not for functionality.
> >
> > RDFParserRegistry
> > RDFWriterRegistry
> > RowSetReaderRegistry, ResultSetReaderRegistry
> > RowSetWriterRegistry, ResultSetWriterRegistry
> > StreamRDFWriter
> >
> > A Lang needs looking up in a registry to see if there is support for it.
>
> Thanks, I didn't know these existed.
>
> But there are no RDFParserRegistry::getRegistered or
> ResultSetReaderRegistry::getRegistered methods?
>
> So do I still need to iterate RDFLanguages::getRegistered and check
> each Lang against
> RDFParserRegistry::isRegistered/ResultSetReaderRegistry::isRegistered?
>
> >
> >Andy
> >
> > On 17/05/2022 09:54, Martynas Jusevičius wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> After upgrading from 4.3.2 to 4.5.0, some of our RDF writing code
> >> started failing.
> >>
> >> It seems that this is due to RDFLanguages.isTriples(Lang.SHACLC)
> >> returning true, which messes up our content negotiation as it attempts
> >> to write Models as SHACLC. Can this be rectified?
> >>
> >> The RDFLanguages registry is a bit of an oxymoron in general. Right
> >> now it's a bag of all sorts of syntaxes Jena supports, half of which
> >> are not even "RDF languages". We need to iterate and filter the
> >> languages just to know which ones can be used to read/write Models,
> >> which can be used for ResultSets etc.:
> >> https://github.com/AtomGraph/Core/blob/master/src/main/java/com/atomgraph/core/MediaTypes.java#L86
> >> Wouldn't it make sense to have separate registries depending on the
> >> entity types they apply to?
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> Martynas
Re: SHACLC and RDFLanguages
PRs welcome. On 23/05/2022 08:51, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: Could RDFParserRegistry::getRegistered and ResultSetReaderRegistry::getRegistered be added? Consistent naming would be registered(). Andy On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 9:01 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: On 20/05/2022 14:05, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: Andy, is that correct? Yes Andy On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:33 PM Martynas Jusevičius wrote: On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:19 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: RDFLanguages is a general registry of names (Lang's) in the system. It is not for functionality. RDFParserRegistry RDFWriterRegistry RowSetReaderRegistry, ResultSetReaderRegistry RowSetWriterRegistry, ResultSetWriterRegistry StreamRDFWriter A Lang needs looking up in a registry to see if there is support for it. Thanks, I didn't know these existed. But there are no RDFParserRegistry::getRegistered or ResultSetReaderRegistry::getRegistered methods? So do I still need to iterate RDFLanguages::getRegistered and check each Lang against RDFParserRegistry::isRegistered/ResultSetReaderRegistry::isRegistered? Andy On 17/05/2022 09:54, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: Hi, After upgrading from 4.3.2 to 4.5.0, some of our RDF writing code started failing. It seems that this is due to RDFLanguages.isTriples(Lang.SHACLC) returning true, which messes up our content negotiation as it attempts to write Models as SHACLC. Can this be rectified? The RDFLanguages registry is a bit of an oxymoron in general. Right now it's a bag of all sorts of syntaxes Jena supports, half of which are not even "RDF languages". We need to iterate and filter the languages just to know which ones can be used to read/write Models, which can be used for ResultSets etc.: https://github.com/AtomGraph/Core/blob/master/src/main/java/com/atomgraph/core/MediaTypes.java#L86 Wouldn't it make sense to have separate registries depending on the entity types they apply to? Thanks. Martynas
Re: SHACLC and RDFLanguages
Could RDFParserRegistry::getRegistered and ResultSetReaderRegistry::getRegistered be added? On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 9:01 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: > > > > On 20/05/2022 14:05, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > > Andy, is that correct? > > Yes > > Andy > > > > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:33 PM Martynas Jusevičius > > wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:19 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: > >>> > >>> RDFLanguages is a general registry of names (Lang's) in the system. > >>> > >>> It is not for functionality. > >>> > >>> RDFParserRegistry > >>> RDFWriterRegistry > >>> RowSetReaderRegistry, ResultSetReaderRegistry > >>> RowSetWriterRegistry, ResultSetWriterRegistry > >>> StreamRDFWriter > >>> > >>> A Lang needs looking up in a registry to see if there is support for it. > >> > >> Thanks, I didn't know these existed. > >> > >> But there are no RDFParserRegistry::getRegistered or > >> ResultSetReaderRegistry::getRegistered methods? > >> > >> So do I still need to iterate RDFLanguages::getRegistered and check > >> each Lang against > >> RDFParserRegistry::isRegistered/ResultSetReaderRegistry::isRegistered? > >> > >>> > >>> Andy > >>> > >>> On 17/05/2022 09:54, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > Hi, > > After upgrading from 4.3.2 to 4.5.0, some of our RDF writing code > started failing. > > It seems that this is due to RDFLanguages.isTriples(Lang.SHACLC) > returning true, which messes up our content negotiation as it attempts > to write Models as SHACLC. Can this be rectified? > > The RDFLanguages registry is a bit of an oxymoron in general. Right > now it's a bag of all sorts of syntaxes Jena supports, half of which > are not even "RDF languages". We need to iterate and filter the > languages just to know which ones can be used to read/write Models, > which can be used for ResultSets etc.: > https://github.com/AtomGraph/Core/blob/master/src/main/java/com/atomgraph/core/MediaTypes.java#L86 > Wouldn't it make sense to have separate registries depending on the > entity types they apply to? > > Thanks. > > Martynas
Re: SHACLC and RDFLanguages
On 20/05/2022 14:05, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: Andy, is that correct? Yes Andy On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:33 PM Martynas Jusevičius wrote: On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:19 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: RDFLanguages is a general registry of names (Lang's) in the system. It is not for functionality. RDFParserRegistry RDFWriterRegistry RowSetReaderRegistry, ResultSetReaderRegistry RowSetWriterRegistry, ResultSetWriterRegistry StreamRDFWriter A Lang needs looking up in a registry to see if there is support for it. Thanks, I didn't know these existed. But there are no RDFParserRegistry::getRegistered or ResultSetReaderRegistry::getRegistered methods? So do I still need to iterate RDFLanguages::getRegistered and check each Lang against RDFParserRegistry::isRegistered/ResultSetReaderRegistry::isRegistered? Andy On 17/05/2022 09:54, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: Hi, After upgrading from 4.3.2 to 4.5.0, some of our RDF writing code started failing. It seems that this is due to RDFLanguages.isTriples(Lang.SHACLC) returning true, which messes up our content negotiation as it attempts to write Models as SHACLC. Can this be rectified? The RDFLanguages registry is a bit of an oxymoron in general. Right now it's a bag of all sorts of syntaxes Jena supports, half of which are not even "RDF languages". We need to iterate and filter the languages just to know which ones can be used to read/write Models, which can be used for ResultSets etc.: https://github.com/AtomGraph/Core/blob/master/src/main/java/com/atomgraph/core/MediaTypes.java#L86 Wouldn't it make sense to have separate registries depending on the entity types they apply to? Thanks. Martynas
Re: SHACLC and RDFLanguages
Andy, is that correct? On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:33 PM Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:19 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: > > > > RDFLanguages is a general registry of names (Lang's) in the system. > > > > It is not for functionality. > > > > RDFParserRegistry > > RDFWriterRegistry > > RowSetReaderRegistry, ResultSetReaderRegistry > > RowSetWriterRegistry, ResultSetWriterRegistry > > StreamRDFWriter > > > > A Lang needs looking up in a registry to see if there is support for it. > > Thanks, I didn't know these existed. > > But there are no RDFParserRegistry::getRegistered or > ResultSetReaderRegistry::getRegistered methods? > > So do I still need to iterate RDFLanguages::getRegistered and check > each Lang against > RDFParserRegistry::isRegistered/ResultSetReaderRegistry::isRegistered? > > > > > Andy > > > > On 17/05/2022 09:54, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > After upgrading from 4.3.2 to 4.5.0, some of our RDF writing code > > > started failing. > > > > > > It seems that this is due to RDFLanguages.isTriples(Lang.SHACLC) > > > returning true, which messes up our content negotiation as it attempts > > > to write Models as SHACLC. Can this be rectified? > > > > > > The RDFLanguages registry is a bit of an oxymoron in general. Right > > > now it's a bag of all sorts of syntaxes Jena supports, half of which > > > are not even "RDF languages". We need to iterate and filter the > > > languages just to know which ones can be used to read/write Models, > > > which can be used for ResultSets etc.: > > > https://github.com/AtomGraph/Core/blob/master/src/main/java/com/atomgraph/core/MediaTypes.java#L86 > > > Wouldn't it make sense to have separate registries depending on the > > > entity types they apply to? > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > Martynas
Re: SHACLC and RDFLanguages
On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 1:19 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: > > RDFLanguages is a general registry of names (Lang's) in the system. > > It is not for functionality. > > RDFParserRegistry > RDFWriterRegistry > RowSetReaderRegistry, ResultSetReaderRegistry > RowSetWriterRegistry, ResultSetWriterRegistry > StreamRDFWriter > > A Lang needs looking up in a registry to see if there is support for it. Thanks, I didn't know these existed. But there are no RDFParserRegistry::getRegistered or ResultSetReaderRegistry::getRegistered methods? So do I still need to iterate RDFLanguages::getRegistered and check each Lang against RDFParserRegistry::isRegistered/ResultSetReaderRegistry::isRegistered? > > Andy > > On 17/05/2022 09:54, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > > Hi, > > > > After upgrading from 4.3.2 to 4.5.0, some of our RDF writing code > > started failing. > > > > It seems that this is due to RDFLanguages.isTriples(Lang.SHACLC) > > returning true, which messes up our content negotiation as it attempts > > to write Models as SHACLC. Can this be rectified? > > > > The RDFLanguages registry is a bit of an oxymoron in general. Right > > now it's a bag of all sorts of syntaxes Jena supports, half of which > > are not even "RDF languages". We need to iterate and filter the > > languages just to know which ones can be used to read/write Models, > > which can be used for ResultSets etc.: > > https://github.com/AtomGraph/Core/blob/master/src/main/java/com/atomgraph/core/MediaTypes.java#L86 > > Wouldn't it make sense to have separate registries depending on the > > entity types they apply to? > > > > Thanks. > > > > Martynas
Re: SHACLC and RDFLanguages
RDFLanguages is a general registry of names (Lang's) in the system. It is not for functionality. RDFParserRegistry RDFWriterRegistry RowSetReaderRegistry, ResultSetReaderRegistry RowSetWriterRegistry, ResultSetWriterRegistry StreamRDFWriter A Lang needs looking up in a registry to see if there is support for it. Andy On 17/05/2022 09:54, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: Hi, After upgrading from 4.3.2 to 4.5.0, some of our RDF writing code started failing. It seems that this is due to RDFLanguages.isTriples(Lang.SHACLC) returning true, which messes up our content negotiation as it attempts to write Models as SHACLC. Can this be rectified? The RDFLanguages registry is a bit of an oxymoron in general. Right now it's a bag of all sorts of syntaxes Jena supports, half of which are not even "RDF languages". We need to iterate and filter the languages just to know which ones can be used to read/write Models, which can be used for ResultSets etc.: https://github.com/AtomGraph/Core/blob/master/src/main/java/com/atomgraph/core/MediaTypes.java#L86 Wouldn't it make sense to have separate registries depending on the entity types they apply to? Thanks. Martynas
SHACLC and RDFLanguages
Hi, After upgrading from 4.3.2 to 4.5.0, some of our RDF writing code started failing. It seems that this is due to RDFLanguages.isTriples(Lang.SHACLC) returning true, which messes up our content negotiation as it attempts to write Models as SHACLC. Can this be rectified? The RDFLanguages registry is a bit of an oxymoron in general. Right now it's a bag of all sorts of syntaxes Jena supports, half of which are not even "RDF languages". We need to iterate and filter the languages just to know which ones can be used to read/write Models, which can be used for ResultSets etc.: https://github.com/AtomGraph/Core/blob/master/src/main/java/com/atomgraph/core/MediaTypes.java#L86 Wouldn't it make sense to have separate registries depending on the entity types they apply to? Thanks. Martynas
