While I think that an endorsed type system is a good idea, I still wonder...
As far as I understood, UIMA has always been advertised as an "empty" framework that does explicitly not prescribe a particular type system - probably to underline it's flexibility. Would that not suffer if UIMA itself provided a standard typesystem? Cheers, -- Richard > On 30.08.2016, at 15:56, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is a great idea. The key will be in discovering and using a workable > "crowd-sourced" (?) process (and perhaps supporting tooling :-) ) that lets a > diverse set of people with somewhat aligned interests converge on a shared > definition. > > -Marshall > > On 8/30/2016 5:40 AM, Jens Grivolla wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> at the LREC conference there were some brief discussions about pushing for >> a "standard" typesystem (and maybe some more things) to make combining UIMA >> annotators from different sources easier. >> >> While it is great that UIMA itself is a generic framework that is >> completely agnostic to the tasks it is used for, there are many users that >> want to be able to use existing analysis engines. Currently they are forced >> to either choose a specific component collection (DKpro, cTakes, JCORE, >> OpenNLP, ...) or write adapters to convert type systems. >> >> There was agreement between some of us (Richard, Peter, etc.) that it would >> be very helpful to guide component developers towards a shared type system >> to make adoption of UIMA easier and avoid fragmentation. >> >> Here are some suggestions on how to proceed: >> >> - go all in and have the UIMA project provide a type system (in the UIMA >> namespace) >> - develop an independent (unofficial) type system that is recommended on >> the UIMA web site >> - develop an unofficial type system and gather endorsements from a variety >> of institutions (UPF, UKP, JulieLab, Averbis, ...) so as to promote this >> type system. >> >> I think (and there was initial agreement on this) that DKpro's type system >> would be a good starting point (with some fixes). >> >> So, how does everybody feel about this, and how do we get started? >> >> Best, >> Jens
