Hi, maybe we could define a specific content part [1] for such config information. This way we do not have to change the interface at all. It is just a matter of filling a to be defined "config content part".
Then we have to write a simple engine that takes config params from an incoming request and writes this information into the config content part. Engines can look up the config per request from the config content part. Maybe Rupert can say more about this as he has defined the content part infrastructure. [1] https://stanbol.apache.org/docs/trunk/components/enhancer/contentitem.html 2012/12/10 David Riccitelli <[email protected]> > Thanks Fabian, > > Yes, I am thinking in the context of the engines that we're contributing, > but it could be useful for the existing engines as well. > > Currently the engines only rely on a provided ContentItem instance for the > enhancement process (computeEnhancements(ContentItem ci)): maybe the > ContentItem interface could be extended to include a reference to a > configuration map. > > Engines that support custom configurations will look-up from this map for > per-call configurations. This would not affect existing engines, but would > enable them to use this feature in the future. > > What do you think? > > David > > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Fabian Christ < > [email protected] > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > are you referring to existing engines in Stanbol or are you using your > own > > ones? > > > > At the moment we do not support such a concept of per request configs. At > > least the current engines do not look in the ContentItem for their > config. > > > > We have another requirement to make it possible to pass existing metadata > > into the request and send text plus existing metadata to Stanbol. Maybe > > such config per request could be a similar case. > > > > Anyway, currently it is not yet supported out of the box IIRC. > > > > Best, > > - Fabian > > > > > > 2012/12/10 David Riccitelli <[email protected]> > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > We have a need to allow passing some engine configuration parameters in > > > each call. > > > > > > For example, we might want for one call to have confidence score > 0.5, > > and > > > for another call > 0.9 (just making up the numbers). > > > > > > Is this feasible now? Can the per-call configuration parameters be > bound > > to > > > the ContentItem? If yes, how? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > David > > > > > > -- > > > David Riccitelli > > > > > > > > > > > > ******************************************************************************** > > > InsideOut10 s.r.l. > > > P.IVA: IT-11381771002 > > > Fax: +39 0110708239 > > > --- > > > LinkedIn: http://it.linkedin.com/in/riccitelli > > > Twitter: ziodave > > > --- > > > Layar Partner Network< > > > > > > http://www.layar.com/publishing/developers/list/?page=1&country=&city=&keyword=insideout10&lpn=1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > ******************************************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Fabian > > http://twitter.com/fctwitt > > > > > > -- > David Riccitelli > > > ******************************************************************************** > InsideOut10 s.r.l. > P.IVA: IT-11381771002 > Fax: +39 0110708239 > --- > LinkedIn: http://it.linkedin.com/in/riccitelli > Twitter: ziodave > --- > Layar Partner Network< > http://www.layar.com/publishing/developers/list/?page=1&country=&city=&keyword=insideout10&lpn=1 > > > > ******************************************************************************** > -- Fabian http://twitter.com/fctwitt
