Eddie Epstein wrote:
The work done here with OSGi convinced me that distributed type
definition is
incompatible and should be eliminated. Instead, UIMA should have type
system
objects containing one or more type defintions and their associated
JCas classes.
Type system objects would be a good fit for OSGi, and be more
consistent with
the concept of types being shared between different analytic components.
Did I understand you correct, you would like to have for each bundle a
service interface containing the type system that the bundle defines and
of course the
implementation of that. So all other bundles can refer these bundles and
use their implementation. But this only works when we do not support
distributed type
definitions, so that the same type can be defined/extended by another
bundle. Right?
-- Michael
