I would love to hear from Karl. Whatever we choose to do has implications on what kinds of attributes are reasonable to serialize. He was the driving force behind having something fancier than simple strings as attribute values.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Jeff Eastman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Ted Dunning wrote: > >> I see what you mean. >> >> To repeat in other words, the problems that need to be solved are: >> >> a) there are many uses already so adding attributes should be transparent >> to >> those who don't use them >> >> b) the encoding should not be ad hoc because this would be our second ad >> hoc >> encoding and only one should ever be allowed before using a standard >> >> > +1 > >> So here is a (kind of) concrete proposal: >> >> a) use JSON or Thrift for concrete syntax >> >> > Any preferences here? This might also impact other Mahout packages in the > future, so everybody please weigh in. In general, it seems that having a > common, public encoding for matrix and vector data would help users mix and > match the Mahout services. What are the requirements of these other > services? From inspection, it looks like only the clustering packages use > them currently. > > Jeff > -- ted
