On 7/20/2011 12:23 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > Am 20.07.2011 um 17:18 schrieb Marshall Schor: > >> This suggests having a tool to make this "easy"; but also suggests that >> having >> individual addon annotators packaged up as a "complete UIMA pipeline" may >> not be >> very interesting to anyone. > I think it would be nice if UIMA provided OSGi bundles as a standard > alternative to the proprietary PEAR format - and every annotator or family of > related annotators in one bundle, yes.
But only the annotator, right? Not also the UIMA framework itself, right? -Marshall > > I would not bundle up models with the annotators, but it would be nice if > models could be resolvable/installable as separate bundles and/or maven > artifacts. For example. in DKPro we wrapped the Stanford Parser and > TreeTagger as an UIMA component without the models and made provisions for > deploying the models to a Maven repository from where they can be added as > dependencies. That's very convenient for our internal users. For licensing > reasons, we currently do not publish these artifacts on a public Maven > repository. > > And as mentioned before, as part of supporting OSGi, it would be nice if UIMA > defined extensions points for publishing type-systems and components. Such a > thing would eventually allow to install components as Eclipse plugins and > have end users click pipelines together in a potential pipeline builder. > > I would not be interested very much in monster-bundles that contain a whole > pipeline that is to be used as a service. > > -- Richard >
