> As for the Filter implementation..... will that be transparant to filter > implementations? I assume so.
I think this was in response to my question about Filter? If you mean that things that currently implement Filter (outside of Jena's own code) will not be greatly affected, then yes, so I would hope. I will @Deprecated Filter and its methods, but that seems to me to be all that is needed for this first step. I should have a PR with this later today, when you can observe some real code and give me feedback. --- A. Soroka The University of Virginia Library On May 1, 2015, at 11:47 AM, Claude Warren <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't see any reason not to remove the Node functions. > > As for the Filter implementation..... will that be transparant to filter > implementations? I assume so. > > On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > >> (mainly for Claude - I did check jena-pemissions and didn't see any usage) >> >> There are a bunch of deprecated statics in Node (the correct way is to use >> NodeFactory) >> >> Node.createAnon() >> Node.createAnon(AnonId) >> Node.createLiteral(LiteralLabel) >> Node.createURI(String) >> Node.createVariable(String) >> Node.createLiteral(String) >> Node.createLiteral(String, String, boolean) >> Node.createLiteral(String, String, RDFDatatype) >> Node.createLiteral(String, RDFDatatype) >> Node.createUncachedLiteral(Object, String, RDFDatatype) >> Node.createUncachedLiteral(Object, RDFDatatype) >> >> It looks like they are not used by the jena codebase and are there for >> compatibility only. >> >> Any reason not to remove them? >> >> Andy >> > > > > -- > I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web > <http://like-like.xenei.com> > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren
