On 1/2/07, Thilo Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Adam Lally wrote:
> On 1/2/07, Thilo Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure there's a contradiction between what I'm proposing,
>> and what's in the spec proposal. When I run an Apache UIMA application,
>> I make the decision what I
Adam Lally wrote:
On 1/2/07, Thilo Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm not sure there's a contradiction between what I'm proposing,
and what's in the spec proposal. When I run an Apache UIMA application,
I make the decision what I want to see in my CAS. Any other application
deserializing XM
On 1/2/07, Thilo Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm not sure there's a contradiction between what I'm proposing,
and what's in the spec proposal. When I run an Apache UIMA application,
I make the decision what I want to see in my CAS. Any other application
deserializing XMI files may do the
Adam Lally wrote:
On 12/30/06, Thilo Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (1) The XMI serialization could contain objects that are not in any
> view, nor referenced from anywhere. Our implementation doesn't
> support that. We'd lose such objects on a deserialization followed by
> serialization
On 12/30/06, Thilo Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why use the bandwidth to design it here, rather than initiate it at
> OASIS?
Because things are happening here, and not at OASIS. If and when that
changes, we can take our discussion there. If you would like to start
some discussion at OAS
Adam Lally wrote:
On 12/29/06, Thilo Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I didn't mean ignore; there isn't much to ignore right now ;-) I'm
waiting to jump on any technical discussion that might develop there,
but there is nothing. I don't have the bandwidth to initiate anything
myself. However,
On 12/29/06, Thilo Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I didn't mean ignore; there isn't much to ignore right now ;-) I'm
waiting to jump on any technical discussion that might develop there,
but there is nothing. I don't have the bandwidth to initiate anything
myself. However, I'm certainly prep
Adam Lally wrote:
I think it would be unwise to ignore the OASIS TC. If we want to do
something different than what the OASIS TC is currently thinking (as
embodied by the research report at this point), and we're confident
it's the right thing, OK -- but then we need to be prepared to sell it
to
On 12/29/06, Thilo Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Also, I don't feel like second-guessing the OASIS TC at this point. We
have nothing but the Research report to on right now, and every reason
to believe that it will change significantly before morphing into a
standard.
I'm not sure I get wh
Marshall Schor wrote:
Adam Lally wrote:
This chain of emails has a lot of tangled threads and this is an
attempt to disentangle them and reevaluate what it we're trying to
acheive.
I think there were basically two motivations for the whole ball of yarn:
(1) We're unhappy with some of our APIs,
Adam Lally wrote:
This chain of emails has a lot of tangled threads and this is an
attempt to disentangle them and reevaluate what it we're trying to
acheive.
I think there were basically two motivations for the whole ball of yarn:
(1) We're unhappy with some of our APIs, in particular (a) the
i
This chain of emails has a lot of tangled threads and this is an
attempt to disentangle them and reevaluate what it we're trying to
acheive.
I think there were basically two motivations for the whole ball of yarn:
(1) We're unhappy with some of our APIs, in particular (a) the
interface "CAS" can
12 matches
Mail list logo
