[jira] [Commented] (JENA-1647) Update jena-iri for RFC 8141 (revised URN RFC).

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1647?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16715099#comment-16715099 ] ASF GitHub Bot commented on JENA-1647: -- Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

[jira] [Commented] (JENA-1647) Update jena-iri for RFC 8141 (revised URN RFC).

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1647?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16715096#comment-16715096 ] ASF subversion and git services commented on JENA-1647: --- Commit

[jira] [Commented] (JENA-1647) Update jena-iri for RFC 8141 (revised URN RFC).

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1647?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16715097#comment-16715097 ] ASF subversion and git services commented on JENA-1647: --- Commit

[jira] [Resolved] (JENA-1647) Update jena-iri for RFC 8141 (revised URN RFC).

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1647?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Andy Seaborne resolved JENA-1647. - Resolution: Fixed > Update jena-iri for RFC 8141 (revised URN RFC). >

[GitHub] jena pull request #505: JENA-1647: Allow '/' and '~' in URNs

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/505 ---

[DISCUSS] Move Jena repo to gitbox or github

I confess I don't completely understand the details/changes here "either the ASF repository system (gitbox.apache.org) OR GitHub for your development and code pushes" unless you can mix-and-match, in case anyone does not want to forced to have a GH account. gitbox.apache.org says "will be

[GitHub] jena issue #473: Extendable versions of classes for printing result sets

Github user afs commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/473 I got sidetracked :-) last time. The code in this area is ancient. Text format isn't like the other formats because (1) it is isn't self-contained, It needs prefixes for abbreviation and (2)

Re: Toward Jena 3.10.0

yes I would think so. looking forward to test the incorporated Fuseki release. On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 8:20 AM Greg Albiston wrote: > Hi Marco, > > There doesn't seem to be an option on the embedded Fuseki Server API to > set for this. > It seems like there is extra configuration done by the

Re: Toward Jena 3.10.0

Hi Marco, There doesn't seem to be an option on the embedded Fuseki Server API to set for this. It seems like there is extra configuration done by the Fuseki release that isn't present in the API. If the GeoSPARQL-Fuseki functionality is incorporated into the Fuseki release then wouldn't