Hey Andy, 

So I’m working on a SPARQL library for Clojure (YeSPARQL, 
https://github.com/joelkuiper/yesparql) and I’m at the point where I want to 
convert Jena native Node, RDFNode, Literal, Triple… objects to formats more 
convenient to work with in Clojure itself (maps, records). 

Now it would be nice if I can use some common format, abstracting away from 
that implementation detail and potentially opening up the door for inter-op 
with other RDF libraries. 

Now it could very well be that this is a case of “we’ll solve it with one more 
layer of abstraction” ad infinitum, but at first glance it seems like it might 
be a nice fit for writing inter-op with other non-Java JVM libraries. 

Joël


> On 26 Aug 2015, at 17:18, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> My first pass at this is:
> https://github.com/afs/commonsrdf-jena
> 
> All packaging and class names temporary.
> 
> What might be more useful is:
> 
> https://github.com/afs/commonsrdf-jena/blob/master/src/main/java/org/apache/jena/commons/Example1.java
> 
> which shows Jena parsing to any commons-rdf Graph.
> The ToGraph class is factory implementation neutral.
> 
> Joël - I'm interested in how you would use CommonsRDF. What use cases do you 
> have in mind?  And where does the data come from or is it created by your 
> code?
> 
> https://github.com/afs/commonsrdf-container
> is a minimal implementation of CommonsRDF - even less than the "simple" one 
> as a test of the designs.
> 
>       Andy
> 
>> On Aug 26, 2015, at 7:45 AM, Joël Kuiper <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hey all,
>>> 
>>> I just got wind of CommonsRDF https://commonsrdf.incubator.apache.org/, and 
>>> it looks great!
>>> It’d be exciting to use this for some of the libraries I’m working on.
>>> Unfortunately I couldn’t find any reference to it in Jena (except for a 
>>> note on CommonsRDF that it might come to Jena 3.0)
>>> 
>>> Can somebody fill me in on the progress of this project?
>>> 
>>> Thanks in advance!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> Joël Kuiper
>>> www.joelkuiper.eu
>>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to