Steven Bethard wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 6:29 AM, Thilo Goetz <[email protected]> wrote: >> Steven Bethard wrote: >>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Cawley, Tim >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I find a common problem is that parameter names in a descriptor can be >>>> misspelt. While the problem settles down once the code and descriptors >>>> are stable, it still got me thinking about two things. >>>> >>>> 1. Could parameter names in a component descriptor be a >>>> reference to a "public static final String" in the implementing class. >>> For what it's worth, in ClearTK we've stopped using analysis engine >>> and CPE descriptors entirely because of the issues with keeping them >>> in sync. Replacing them with code means that we can now just refer to >>> our static final variables directly, and the compiler enforces that we >>> didn't misspell anything (and fixes references automatically when we >>> refactor). >> I don't know the details of what you did, but it sounds to me like >> you threw many advantages of UIMA (reusability, transparent remotability >> etc.) right out of the window. > > I don't see why that would be the case. We're still creating > AnalysisEngineDescriptions, just in Java code, not XML. See, for > example line 184 of: > > http://code.google.com/p/cleartk/source/browse/trunk/src/org/cleartk/token/TokenAnnotator.java > > The components are still just as reusable and pluggable. See, for example: > > http://code.google.com/p/cleartk/source/browse/trunk/src/org/cleartk/example/pos/BuildTestExamplePosModel.java > http://code.google.com/p/cleartk/source/browse/trunk/src/org/cleartk/example/pos/RunExamplePOSAnnotator.java > > And of course, anyone who wants to use our components through XML > descriptors can easily write their own. > > I haven't played around with "transparent remotability", but I can't > see why using Java descriptors instead of XML descriptors would make > that any harder. Maybe you can elaborate?
In my opinion, having to write your own descriptor to an annotator that you're not familiar with (and don't necessarily want to become familiar with) makes reuse harder. --Thilo > > Steve
