Andrew,
see my answer. Things are a little bit more difficult when you generate
the descriptors on the fly because it's not just a matter of changing
the content of static ones. But yes I trust Marshall on that, it is
just that I think we should think twice before deprecating methods.
Besides I believe one great virtue of a standard is stability and well I
spent far too much time on this necessary upgrade to Eclipse 3.3 and I
would have been more than happy not to be obliged to move on UIMA Apache
on top of that.
Andrew Serff wrote:
I can attest to only having to change the package names. I converted
the BaLIE Annoator in a matter of seconds by just changing the package
names to use the apache package names. I didn't have to change
anything else to use it under the Apache UIMA. So I'd keep on trying,
let everyone know what your specific problem is and I'm sure someone
will be able to help you. IBM isn't moving forward on the UIMA SDK
(unless I just don't know...), so it seems almost necessary that
people move to Apache if they want to get new features, etc.
Good Luck!
Andrew
Marshall Schor wrote:
Hi -
Sorry to hear you're having such a frustrating time!
It's a little hard to figure out what might be helpful here without some
further details. I don't think anything changed in the implementation
that would alter the behavior you describe regarding CPEs. Can you
describe what's going wrong?
We're continually trying to balance going forward with keeping backwards
compatibility. When moving to Apache UIMA, there was a need to change
the package names (to org.apache.uima...) - that was the biggest change
that required users to change their code and recompile. We included a
utility that attempted to update the source for these changes - were you
able to make use of it?
-Marshall
Christian Mauceri wrote:
I spent some hours in trying to port my old UIMA IBM Appli in the
Apache version and it's a real pain where you know. I do not
understand why to change things at this point and make things so
difficult for the others. I do not see the benefit for anybody, one
can imagine the decision to use UIMA is not spending all the time in
trying to understand the deprecated functions, the PATH rules etc.
Something becomes a standard because it is supposed to be useful and
make people life easier. For my deepest regret it is not the case for
this version of UIMA. Among other thing I cannot understand why it is
not possible to embed in simple way descriptors and CPEs in a plugin
and forget the machinery beyond, let's imagine if for instance EMF
produced such head ache.
In the IBM version it was possible to generate a CPE and put it in a
folder with the other descriptors and have an Eclipse action doing
something like :
CpeDescription cpeDesc = UIMAFramework.getXMLParser()
.parseCpeDescription(
new
XMLInputSource(cpeFile.getLocation().toOSString()));
CollectionProcessingEngine cpe =
UIMAFramework.produceCollectionProcessingEngine(cpeDesc);
then something like
monitor.beginTask("Starting CPE", nod);
//Create and register a Status Callback Listener
StatusCallbackListenerImpl cbl =
new StatusCallbackListenerImpl(monitor);
cpe.addStatusCallbackListener(cbl);
cpe.process();
while (!cbl.isFinished()){
if(monitor.isCanceled()){
cpe.stop();
return Status.CANCEL_STATUS;
}
}
without worrying about the CLASSPATH or I do not know what, why is it
that difficult now? Because we have to suffer before having the right
to use this so wonderful framework?
I'm at 1 month from a crucial deadline, I need the Eclipse 3.3
version, I regret my first choice, deeply!
--
Cordialement/Regards
Christian Mauceri
http://hermeneute.com/Christian
