On 2/2/07, Marshall Schor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Should the following two terms be renamed to Apache UIMA Java
> Framework and Apache UIMA SDK? And should there be a definition for
> "Apache UIMA" without the "SDK" part - in which case what is the
> difference, Apache UIMA is the project, and the SDK is the artifact we
> produce?
Hmmm - not sure what the "following 2 terms" are?
I just meant "UIMA Java Framework" renamed to "Apache UIMA Java
Framework" and "UIMA SDK" renamed to "Apache UIMA SDK". So my
suggested definitions would look sometihng like:
UIMA: UIMA is an acronym that stands for Unstructured Information
Management Architecture; it is a software architecture which
specifies component interfaces, design patterns and development
roles for creating, describing, discovering, composing and deploying
multi-modal analysis capabilities. The UIMA specification is being developed
by a technical committee at OASIS (hyperlink here).
Apache UIMA Java Framework:
A Java-based implementation of the UIMA architecture, developed by
the Apache UIMA Project. It provides
a run-time environment in which developers can plug in and run
their UIMA component implementations and with which they can
build and deploy UIM applications.
Apache UIMA Software Development Kit (SDK):
The SDK includes the framework plus additional components such
as tooling and examples. Some of the tooling is Eclipse-based
http://www.eclipse.org/).
I think that some UIMA terms should start with UIMA so people find them :-).
OK, but which terms? Do you want to keep UIMA Java Framework as a
term? This just seems strange to me, that we wouldn't use the Apache
name to refer to it.
I would drop the UIMA SDK as a term.
I'm surprised that "SDK" was deleted elsewhere. The thing we
distribute is still an SDK, I thought.
So you're suggesting that the term "Apache UIMA" means what we used to
call the SDK, and you'd add a new term "Apache UIMA Project" to refer
to the project?
-Adam
