Our code depends on Jena indirectly through SPIN API, the latest release of
which (2.0.0) uses Jena 3.0.1:
http://topbraid.org/spin/api/

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 at 15:04, Rob Vesse <rve...@dotnetrdf.org> wrote:

> I don’t know why the default was changed but please bear in mind that
> you’re not just going from 2.x to 3.x but are jumping from 2.11.0 which was
> released September 2013 to 3.0.1 which was released December 2015 and there
> were six other releases between those two. Lots of things changed in that
> timescale.
>
>  Is there a particular reason you are not going straight to 3.1.0 which is
> from May 2016?
>
> Rob
>
> On 22/07/2016 10:27, "Martynas Jusevičius" <marty...@graphity.org> wrote:
>
>     RDFWriterRegistry.register(Lang.RDFXML, RDFFormat.RDFXML_PLAIN) did
> the trick.
>
>     Why was the default changed though? I think it should be mentioned in
>     the 3.x migration guide:
>     https://jena.apache.org/documentation/migrate_jena2_jena3.html
>
>     On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>     > On 21/07/16 23:44, Martynas Jusevičius wrote:
>     >>
>     >> Hey,
>     >>
>     >> I noticed that after upgrade from 2.11.0 to 3.0.1 the RDF/XML output
>     >> changed: element name is used instead of rdf:Description + rdf:type,
>     >> rdf:nodeID attribute is gone etc (output below).
>     >>
>     >> The model is written the same way, like this:
>     >>
>     >>   model.write(baos, RDFLanguages.RDFXML.getName(), null);
>     >
>     >
>     > RDFFormat for variants:
>     >
>     > RDFDataMgr.write(baos, model, RDFFormat.RDFXML_PLAIN);
>     >
>     >>
>     >> Am I right? How do I get the old behavior, i.e. write the plain
> RDF/XML
>     >> format?
>     >
>     >
>     > RDFFormat.RDFXML_PLAIN
>     >
>     > Or change the registry?
>     >
>     >         model.write(System.out, "RDF/XML") ;
>     >         RDFWriterRegistry.register(Lang.RDFXML,
> RDFFormat.RDFXML_PLAIN);
>     >         model.write(System.out, "RDF/XML") ;
>     >
>     >         Andy
>     >
>     >
>     >>
>     >> I think I have traced 3.0.1 behaviour to
>     >> RDFWriterRegistry.defaultSerialization(Lang lang) which chooses
>     >> RDFFormat(Lang.RDFXML, ABBREV).
>     >>
>     >> 2.11.0
>     >>
>     >>             <rdf:RDF
>     >> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#";
>     >>                      xmlns:j.0="http://purl.org/dc/terms/";
>     >>                      xmlns:j.1="http://www.w3.org/2011/http#";>
>     >>                <rdf:Description rdf:nodeID="A0">
>     >>                   <j.0:title
>     >> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string";>Agent not
>     >> authorized</j.0:title>
>     >>                   <rdf:type
>     >> rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2011/http#Response";></rdf:type>
>     >>                   <j.1:reasonPhrase
>     >>
>     >> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string
> ">Forbidden</j.1:reasonPhrase>
>     >>                   <j.1:sc
>     >> rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2011/http-statusCodes#Forbidden
> "></j.1:sc>
>     >>                   <j.1:statusCodeValue
>     >>
>     >> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#long
> ">403</j.1:statusCodeValue>
>     >>                </rdf:Description>
>     >>             </rdf:RDF>
>     >>
>     >> 3.0.1
>     >>
>     >>          <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="
> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#";
>     >>                   xmlns:j.0="http://purl.org/dc/terms/";
>     >>                   xmlns:j.1="http://www.w3.org/2011/http#";>
>     >>             <j.1:Response>
>     >>                <j.0:title>Agent not authorized</j.0:title>
>     >>                <j.1:sc
>     >> rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2011/http-statusCodes#Forbidden
> "></j.1:sc>
>     >>                <j.1:reasonPhrase>Forbidden</j.1:reasonPhrase>
>     >>                <j.1:statusCodeValue
>     >>
>     >> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#long
> ">403</j.1:statusCodeValue>
>     >>             </j.1:Response>
>     >>          </rdf:RDF>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> Martynas
>     >> atomgraph.com
>     >>
>     >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to