opennlp-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "william.colen@gmail.com" <william.co...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: OpenNLP 1.5.3 ....
Date Thu, 03 May 2012 11:20:48 GMT
>From my side I need to add things to the manual, like about the evaluation
reports and customization factories. But documentation can be finished
while we try our release candidates.

Besides that there is an issue Jörn mentioned before, we are not supporting
OSGi as we should, at least not the Customization Factories.

My vote is +1, but I would ask a couple of weeks for me to implement the
MutableDictionary and check the Customization Factories.


On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Jim - FooBar(); <jimpil1985@gmail.com>wrote:

>  I can also provide the "AggregateNameFinder" class which takes any number
> of name-finders and merges their results in order to get better evaluation
> statistics. Internally, it uses the "NameFinderME.**dropOverlappingSpans()"
> method to get rid of nested spans, which however does the simplistic thing
> of keeping the earliest span (ignoring the type of the span completely). I
> think being able to merge results from several name-finders is a killer
> feature that a lot of people will appreciate even if i don't think keeping
> the earliest span is sensible when trying to evaluate several finders on
> multiple entity types...
>
> Jim
>
>
> On 03/05/12 05:16, Boris Galitsky wrote:
>
>> Hi James
>> Should Similarity component come with 1.5.3?
>> It has been stable for more than a month now and needs just a final touch
>> RegardsBoris
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 22:50:12 -0400
>>> From: james.kosin@gmail.com
>>> To: dev@opennlp.apache.org
>>> Subject: OpenNLP 1.5.3 ....
>>>
>>> Everyone,
>>>
>>> Does anyone object to us releasing a 1.5.3 release?
>>> I'm only asking because we have several important fixes currently in
>>> trunk that some people are coming across as they are trying to use and
>>> we also haven't had a release since graduating.
>>> I'm not trying to push the issue; but, would be nice.
>>>
>>> I've also got more data we can test against with the addition of the
>>> ConLL 02 and ConLLX data I downloaded that is available.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> James
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

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