I see that I can achieve the same with RDFConnection as with DatasetAccessor.
But conceptually I don't think this was a good idea. An RDF dataset has multiple interfaces: * Linked Data * SPARQL Protocol * Graph Store Protocol I think Jena, as a lower-level RDF API, should provide stable interfaces for each of them, which then can have different implementations. It shouldn't be a moving target. RDFConnection conflates all of them instead. Why couldn't it just extend DatasetAccessor? And something like the EndpointAccessor that we have: https://github.com/AtomGraph/Core/blob/master/src/main/java/com/atomgraph/core/model/EndpointAccessor.java We have separate clients for each of those, so RDFConnection doesn't help. On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 9:58 AM Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > > RDFConnection > > which is a collection of interfaces including 2 for dataset operations > (read and write). > > > On 27/04/2020 13:33, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Why is DatasetAccessor marked as deprecated in the latest Jena? > > https://jena.apache.org/documentation/javadoc/arq/org/apache/jena/query/DatasetAccessor.html > > > > What is meant to replace it? > > > > Martynas > >
