Re: next UIMA workshop?

[Jens Grivolla <j+...@grivolla.net>]

We have been asked to merge our workshop with a similar one focusing on 
"open infrastructures".  The result is a "Workshop on Open 
Infrastructures and Analysis Frameworks for HLT".

We will now start to build a common CFP from the two proposals.  All 
contributions are welcome: 
https://github.com/jgrivolla/coling2014-nlp-framework-workshop/blob/master/cfp.md

-- Jens

On 19/01/14 15:40, Jens Grivolla wrote:
> I have sent the proposal, we'll see what they say...
>
> -- Jens
>
> On 17/01/14 15:02, Jens Grivolla wrote:
>> On 15/01/14 20:51, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>>> On 15.01.2014, at 15:10, Jens Grivolla
>>> <j+...@grivolla.net> wrote:
>>>> The CFP itself must still be rewritten to be less UIMA-centric, other
>>>> than that this is starting to look quite good.
>>
>> GATE developer Mark A. Greenwood did the rewrite and sent me a pull
>> request on Github.
>>
>>> For example, the topic "experience reports combining UIMA-based
>>> components from different sources, as well as solutions to
>>> interoperability issues" could be reworded as:
>>>
>>> 1) experience reports combining language analysis components from
>>> different sources, as well as solutions to interoperability issues
>>>
>>> 2) experience reports combining different frameworks (e.g.
>>> GATE/UIMA/WebLicht/etc.), as well as solutions to interoperability
>>> issues
>>
>> I put both in there as separate points.
>>
>>> I think both aspects would be interesting. I'm a little afraid that 1)
>>> might end up iterating the existing of frameworks like UIMA, while 2)
>>> would end up referring over web-services or semantic web stuff for
>>> interoperability - which may not be very interesting. I'd be more
>>> interested in issues and solutions exist beyond this, e.g. with
>>> regards to the interchangability of components. What problems exist
>>> when e.g. one parser component in a workflow is replaced with a
>>> different one? How can these be solved? (Cf. Noh and Padó, 2013 [1]).
>>
>> Agree.  Subtle semantic differences between alternative components can
>> be more challenging than the technical integration.  I'm not sure how to
>> put that in the CFP without it getting very verbose, though.
>>
>>> I think one more topic could be added:
>>>
>>> - "combining annotation type systems in processing frameworks (GATE,
>>> UIMA, etc.) with standardization efforts, such as done in the ISO
>>> TC37/SC4 or TEI contexts."
>>
>> Done. Thanks for your input.
>>
>> As always, the current state of the proposal can be seen on Github:
>> https://github.com/jgrivolla/coling2014-nlp-framework-workshop/blob/master/proposal.md
>>
>>
>>
>> I think the current version is pretty close to final. If there are any
>> more suggestions hurry up, the deadline is approaching.
>>
>> -- Jens
>>
>>
>
>
>

Re: next UIMA workshop?

[Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>]

On 4/9/2014 12:15 PM, Jens Grivolla wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:12 PM, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3/26/2014 9:44 AM, Jens Grivolla wrote:
>>> Finally, despite the fact that UIMA does not appear in the title anymore,
>>> would it be possible to have an announcement on the UIMA web page?
>> I think so (unless others disagree).  Can you draft something?
>>
> I tried to prepare a draft for svnpubsub to see how it fits with the UIMA
> site (without linking to it at first, of course), and created
> uima-website/xdocs/coling14.xml
> It then seems that I need to rebuild the site on my machine with ANT and
> push the resulting changes in docs/, which I did.  The resulting page can
> be seen at http://uima.apache.org/coling14.html and looks more or less ok.
>
> I hope I didn't do anything wrong by committing directly to the site, but I
> didn't find a good way to try it in the actual page layout and show the
> results otherwise. In any case it's not linked from anywhere and shouldn't
> affect any other parts of the site.
Seems fine to me :-).  Please see about linking to it (perhaps from News and the
left-hand nav bar under Events and Conferences).  Thanks!  -Marshall
> -- Jens
>

Re: next UIMA workshop?

[Jens Grivolla <j+...@grivolla.net>]

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:12 PM, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:

>
> On 3/26/2014 9:44 AM, Jens Grivolla wrote:
> > Finally, despite the fact that UIMA does not appear in the title anymore,
> > would it be possible to have an announcement on the UIMA web page?
>
> I think so (unless others disagree).  Can you draft something?
>

I tried to prepare a draft for svnpubsub to see how it fits with the UIMA
site (without linking to it at first, of course), and created
uima-website/xdocs/coling14.xml
It then seems that I need to rebuild the site on my machine with ANT and
push the resulting changes in docs/, which I did.  The resulting page can
be seen at http://uima.apache.org/coling14.html and looks more or less ok.

I hope I didn't do anything wrong by committing directly to the site, but I
didn't find a good way to try it in the actual page layout and show the
results otherwise. In any case it's not linked from anywhere and shouldn't
affect any other parts of the site.

-- Jens

Re: next UIMA workshop?

[Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>]

On 3/26/2014 9:44 AM, Jens Grivolla wrote:
> Hi all, I have just posted the (more or less) final CFP on uima-user and
> uima-dev.
>
> Feel free to distribute the CFP to anybody you think would be interested. 
> While this has been merged with a different workshop and thus has a somewhat
> wider scope than just UIMA, I still view this as a followup to the the UIMA
> workshop at GSCL and would hope to have similarly interesting contributions
> from the UIMA community.
>
> If you are a PC member, or willing to be one, please contact me off-list with
> the email address and affiliation that you would like me to use for this purpose.
>
> Finally, despite the fact that UIMA does not appear in the title anymore,
> would it be possible to have an announcement on the UIMA web page?

I think so (unless others disagree).  Can you draft something?

-Marshall
>
> -- Jens
>
> On 05/02/14 11:46, Jens Grivolla wrote:
>> We have been asked to merge our workshop with a similar one focusing on
>> "open infrastructures".  The result is a "Workshop on Open
>> Infrastructures and Analysis Frameworks for HLT".
>>
>> We will now start to build a common CFP from the two proposals.  All
>> contributions are welcome:
>> https://github.com/jgrivolla/coling2014-nlp-framework-workshop/blob/master/cfp.md
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Jens
>>
>> On 19/01/14 15:40, Jens Grivolla wrote:
>>> I have sent the proposal, we'll see what they say...
>>>
>>> -- Jens
>>>
>>> On 17/01/14 15:02, Jens Grivolla wrote:
>>>> On 15/01/14 20:51, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>>>>> On 15.01.2014, at 15:10, Jens Grivolla
>>>>> <j+...@grivolla.net> wrote:
>>>>>> The CFP itself must still be rewritten to be less UIMA-centric, other
>>>>>> than that this is starting to look quite good.
>>>>
>>>> GATE developer Mark A. Greenwood did the rewrite and sent me a pull
>>>> request on Github.
>>>>
>>>>> For example, the topic "experience reports combining UIMA-based
>>>>> components from different sources, as well as solutions to
>>>>> interoperability issues" could be reworded as:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) experience reports combining language analysis components from
>>>>> different sources, as well as solutions to interoperability issues
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) experience reports combining different frameworks (e.g.
>>>>> GATE/UIMA/WebLicht/etc.), as well as solutions to interoperability
>>>>> issues
>>>>
>>>> I put both in there as separate points.
>>>>
>>>>> I think both aspects would be interesting. I'm a little afraid that 1)
>>>>> might end up iterating the existing of frameworks like UIMA, while 2)
>>>>> would end up referring over web-services or semantic web stuff for
>>>>> interoperability - which may not be very interesting. I'd be more
>>>>> interested in issues and solutions exist beyond this, e.g. with
>>>>> regards to the interchangability of components. What problems exist
>>>>> when e.g. one parser component in a workflow is replaced with a
>>>>> different one? How can these be solved? (Cf. Noh and Padó, 2013 [1]).
>>>>
>>>> Agree.  Subtle semantic differences between alternative components can
>>>> be more challenging than the technical integration.  I'm not sure how to
>>>> put that in the CFP without it getting very verbose, though.
>>>>
>>>>> I think one more topic could be added:
>>>>>
>>>>> - "combining annotation type systems in processing frameworks (GATE,
>>>>> UIMA, etc.) with standardization efforts, such as done in the ISO
>>>>> TC37/SC4 or TEI contexts."
>>>>
>>>> Done. Thanks for your input.
>>>>
>>>> As always, the current state of the proposal can be seen on Github:
>>>> https://github.com/jgrivolla/coling2014-nlp-framework-workshop/blob/master/proposal.md
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think the current version is pretty close to final. If there are any
>>>> more suggestions hurry up, the deadline is approaching.
>>>>
>>>> -- Jens
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

Re: next UIMA workshop?

[Jens Grivolla <j+...@grivolla.net>]

Hi all, I have just posted the (more or less) final CFP on uima-user and 
uima-dev.

Feel free to distribute the CFP to anybody you think would be 
interested.  While this has been merged with a different workshop and 
thus has a somewhat wider scope than just UIMA, I still view this as a 
followup to the the UIMA workshop at GSCL and would hope to have 
similarly interesting contributions from the UIMA community.

If you are a PC member, or willing to be one, please contact me off-list 
with the email address and affiliation that you would like me to use for 
this purpose.

Finally, despite the fact that UIMA does not appear in the title 
anymore, would it be possible to have an announcement on the UIMA web page?

-- Jens

On 05/02/14 11:46, Jens Grivolla wrote:
> We have been asked to merge our workshop with a similar one focusing on
> "open infrastructures".  The result is a "Workshop on Open
> Infrastructures and Analysis Frameworks for HLT".
>
> We will now start to build a common CFP from the two proposals.  All
> contributions are welcome:
> https://github.com/jgrivolla/coling2014-nlp-framework-workshop/blob/master/cfp.md
>
>
> -- Jens
>
> On 19/01/14 15:40, Jens Grivolla wrote:
>> I have sent the proposal, we'll see what they say...
>>
>> -- Jens
>>
>> On 17/01/14 15:02, Jens Grivolla wrote:
>>> On 15/01/14 20:51, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>>>> On 15.01.2014, at 15:10, Jens Grivolla
>>>> <j+...@grivolla.net> wrote:
>>>>> The CFP itself must still be rewritten to be less UIMA-centric, other
>>>>> than that this is starting to look quite good.
>>>
>>> GATE developer Mark A. Greenwood did the rewrite and sent me a pull
>>> request on Github.
>>>
>>>> For example, the topic "experience reports combining UIMA-based
>>>> components from different sources, as well as solutions to
>>>> interoperability issues" could be reworded as:
>>>>
>>>> 1) experience reports combining language analysis components from
>>>> different sources, as well as solutions to interoperability issues
>>>>
>>>> 2) experience reports combining different frameworks (e.g.
>>>> GATE/UIMA/WebLicht/etc.), as well as solutions to interoperability
>>>> issues
>>>
>>> I put both in there as separate points.
>>>
>>>> I think both aspects would be interesting. I'm a little afraid that 1)
>>>> might end up iterating the existing of frameworks like UIMA, while 2)
>>>> would end up referring over web-services or semantic web stuff for
>>>> interoperability - which may not be very interesting. I'd be more
>>>> interested in issues and solutions exist beyond this, e.g. with
>>>> regards to the interchangability of components. What problems exist
>>>> when e.g. one parser component in a workflow is replaced with a
>>>> different one? How can these be solved? (Cf. Noh and Padó, 2013 [1]).
>>>
>>> Agree.  Subtle semantic differences between alternative components can
>>> be more challenging than the technical integration.  I'm not sure how to
>>> put that in the CFP without it getting very verbose, though.
>>>
>>>> I think one more topic could be added:
>>>>
>>>> - "combining annotation type systems in processing frameworks (GATE,
>>>> UIMA, etc.) with standardization efforts, such as done in the ISO
>>>> TC37/SC4 or TEI contexts."
>>>
>>> Done. Thanks for your input.
>>>
>>> As always, the current state of the proposal can be seen on Github:
>>> https://github.com/jgrivolla/coling2014-nlp-framework-workshop/blob/master/proposal.md
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think the current version is pretty close to final. If there are any
>>> more suggestions hurry up, the deadline is approaching.
>>>
>>> -- Jens
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>