uima-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Asher Stern <aste...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: General question about UimaFIT
Date Fri, 09 Sep 2016 17:22:06 GMT
Hi.
Thanks for your answers.
So it seems that programming-language independence is the primal reason to
do things as they have done.

Many thanks,
Asher.


2016-09-09 18:49 GMT+03:00 Richard Eckart de Castilho <rec@apache.org>:

> On 09.09.2016, at 17:37, Asher Stern <astern7@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > You explanation really makes things clear, and also answers my question.
> >
> > I still wonder whether some automatic mechanism can be developed to
> > automatically generate TypeDescription and TypeSystemDescription directly
> > from a Java class (under some conditions).
> > This can shorten the learning curve of UIMA and remove the need for
> > automatically-generated code, as well as tracking XML files in the
> > classpath. (Such benefits are actually part of the primary goals of
> > UimaFIT. Isn't it?)
> > Though, such a development, even if possible, would not be trivial.
>
> The way that UIMA works, the JCas files are not meant to be a canonical
> source of metadata information. The typesystem is an independent schema
> and the JCas classes are a convenience. They can be used, but they do
> not have to be used. In some cases, it is more reasonable to use
> the CAS API instead of the JCas API and to operate entirely without
> the JCas classes. E.g. an annotation editor where you can flexibibly
> define types (such as WebAnno) would rely on the CAS API where
> annotations are accessed by name instead of on the JCas API where
> compiled Java classes are required.
>
> So JCas is optional, but type descriptors are not.
>
> With components, it is different. The descriptor is meaningless without
> the implementing component.
>
> If somebody thought it would be worth the effort to generate type
> descriptors
> from annotated Java classes, it wouldn't be just annotating fields or
> methods.
> Some code generation would probably be involved, maybe comparable to how
> Lombok
> works. That approach has its own drawbacks starting from requiring a
> compiler
> plugin and going until e.g. Eclipse being unable to search for references
> of
> auto-generated methods.
>
> I'll not spend my time atm to follow that idea, but maybe you want to try
> it? ;)
>
> Btw. there is ongoing work on a reimplementation of the CAS (and JCas)
> towards
> a UIMA v3 in the future. If you consider diving into this, you may want to
> read a bit in the recent archives of the developer mailing list first.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -- Richard

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