Mailing-List: contact dev-help@uima.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@uima.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of msa@schor.com designates
 67.18.144.2 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <5170090F.4010907@schor.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:54:07 -0400
From: Marshall Schor <msa@schor.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@uima.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] New name for UIMA TextMarker
References: <516FC6A4.7090708@uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <516FC6A4.7090708@uni-wuerzburg.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I'm basically +1 for any of these.

Some specific comments:
UIMA-TRL - good that it's short an simple. 

For the rest of the candidates, I think in actual documentation, the full names
should not use the upper-case acronym convention - it disrupts the readability,
in my opinion.

In general, I think the shorter names are preferable.

-Marshall

On 4/18/2013 6:10 AM, Peter Kl�gl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> we are currently looking for a new name for the Apache UIMA TextMarker system
> (language and workbench) and invite the UIMA comunity to vote for a name.
> This is not a formal vote. The vote should be cast for one of the following
> options, but is not limited to those.
>
> Option 1:
> name:                     UIMA-TRL
> (full) name:            UIMA Text Rule Language
> package identifier: trl
>
> Option 2a:
> name:                     UIMA-RUCOLA
> (full) name:            UIMA RUle-based, COncise text annotation LAnguage
> package identifier: rucola
>
> Option 2b:
> name:                     UIMA-RUCOLA
> (full) name:            UIMA RUle-COre (text) LAnguage
> package identifier: rucola
>
> Option 3:
> name:               UIMA-RUCOTALA
> (full) name:        UIMA RUle-based, COncise Text Annotation LAnguage
> package identifier: rucotala
>
>
> Please cast your vote(s):
> [ ] +1 Option ... is a suitable name
> [ ]  0 Don't care for option ...
> [ ] -1 Option ... is not OK, because ...
>
> All votes are welcome, but only votes of UIMA PMC members are binding. Votes
> with -1 must provide some substantial (e.g. legal) objections.
>
> The previous discussion about possible names can be found here:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-2811
>
> Best,
>
> Peter
>