Well, close - but I think the file- and connection-specific methods like close() make it less clean than DatasetAccessor.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:49 AM Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote: > > Because > > RDFConnection > >> which is a collection of interfaces including 2 for dataset operations > >> (read and write). > > extends > RDFDatasetAccessConnection > RDFDatasetConnection > > Andy > > On 28/04/2020 09:11, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > > 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 <a...@apache.org> 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 > >>>
