incubator-clerezza-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Clerezza CAS Consumer
Date Mon, 04 Apr 2011 10:11:08 GMT
Hi all,
we actually have a base ontology for mapping CAS to RDF in uima.ontologies
[1] that is very simple and should be surely extended.
A basic CAS to RDF is done inside uima.utils [2] (enhanceNode() method) but
I think it'd be good to create a CAS Consumer since that would enable easy
deploy of existing UIMA pipelines in Clerezza only adding the CAS Consumer.

More over one could have its own ontology for CAS mapping so one other thing
to add would be to make the used ontology configurable (it should be a
parameter of the CAS Consumer descriptor).

The primary use case for such a CAS Consumer is allowing easy connection
between existing UIMA base engines and Clerezza, then, as you can see from
the previously linked thread on stanbol-dev, it would allow easier run of
UIMA pipelines in Stanbol.
I imagine a base demo app allowing a REST call to Clerezza to enrich a plain
text with UIMA and then see the (RDF) graph of metadata bound to the text
node.
Regarding the TcProvider I think we just need to provide the code to make
the mapping given an ontology for CAS mapping.
Regards,
Tommaso

[1] :
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/clerezza/trunk/parent/uima/uima.ontologies/src/main/resources/org/apache/clerezza/uima/ontologies/
[2] :
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/clerezza/trunk/parent/uima/uima.utils/src/main/java/org/apache/clerezza/uima/utils/UIMAUtils.java

2011/4/4 Hasan Hasan <hasan@trialox.org>

> Hi Reto,
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer <
> reto.bachmann@trialox.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Hasan
> >
> >
> >> @Reto, do we want to have a dedicated TcProvider or rather define an
> >> ontology for
> >> the mapping of CAS into properties and classes ?
> >> I think we should discuss both alternatives or why to you prefer one
> over
> >> the other?
> >>
> > I don't see the conflict. How should A TcProvider map the entities
> without
> > an ontology? An what's the benefit of an ontology without a tool that
> does
> > the mapping?
> >
>
> Probably, I misunderstand you. I thought you would like to have a special
> TcProvider that does this mapping instead of using any TcProvider we have.
>
> cheers
> hasan
>
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > reto
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Kind regards
> >> Hasan
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer <
> >> reto.bachmann@trialox.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Tommaso
> >>>
> >>> Rdfizing the CAS and providing a TcProvider that provides a graph view
> to
> >>> the UIMA CAS data sounds like a grat plan. I imagine there would be
> >>> interesting stuff that can be done implementing cas consumers on
> >>> clerezza.
> >>> Do you have ideas for usecases and demo apps?
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Reto
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Tommaso Teofili
> >>> <tommaso.teofili@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Hi all,
> >>> > recently I've been discussing with Stanbol mates [1] about possible
> >>> usage
> >>> > of
> >>> > text mining algorithms in Stanbol on top of UIMA, so, since they're
> >>> already
> >>> > using Clerezza we agreed that it'd be good to implement a component
> >>> which
> >>> > converts objects from the UIMA CAS model to a Clerezza Graph.
> >>> > Since I am familiar with both I'd volunteer to implement such a thing
> >>> > inside
> >>> > the uima module.
> >>> > What do you think?
> >>> > Regards,
> >>> > Tommaso
> >>> >
> >>> > [1] :
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> http://markmail.org/thread/2sstx2girbiydath#query:+page:1+mid:wbky7miem5ggdsi2+state:results
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message