Hi Reto, On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer < [email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Hasan > > >> @Reto, do we want to have a dedicated TcProvider or rather define an >> ontology for >> the mapping of CAS into properties and classes ? >> I think we should discuss both alternatives or why to you prefer one over >> the other? >> > I don't see the conflict. How should A TcProvider map the entities without > an ontology? An what's the benefit of an ontology without a tool that does > the mapping? > Probably, I misunderstand you. I thought you would like to have a special TcProvider that does this mapping instead of using any TcProvider we have. cheers hasan > > Cheers, > reto > > > >> >> Kind regards >> Hasan >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Tommaso >>> >>> Rdfizing the CAS and providing a TcProvider that provides a graph view to >>> the UIMA CAS data sounds like a grat plan. I imagine there would be >>> interesting stuff that can be done implementing cas consumers on >>> clerezza. >>> Do you have ideas for usecases and demo apps? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Reto >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Tommaso Teofili >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>> > Hi all, >>> > recently I've been discussing with Stanbol mates [1] about possible >>> usage >>> > of >>> > text mining algorithms in Stanbol on top of UIMA, so, since they're >>> already >>> > using Clerezza we agreed that it'd be good to implement a component >>> which >>> > converts objects from the UIMA CAS model to a Clerezza Graph. >>> > Since I am familiar with both I'd volunteer to implement such a thing >>> > inside >>> > the uima module. >>> > What do you think? >>> > Regards, >>> > Tommaso >>> > >>> > [1] : >>> > >>> > >>> http://markmail.org/thread/2sstx2girbiydath#query:+page:1+mid:wbky7miem5ggdsi2+state:results >>> > >>> >> >> >
