Re: [Abstract Interfaces Sub-Group] Getting Started

[Adam Lally <alally@us.ibm.com>]

Alex, Chris, Adrian, and Eric,

I realize last week was a short week
for many people and that everyone is busy, so my proposed schedule may
have been unrealistic.  If each of you could post what you think is
a more reasonable timeframe for when you would have a chance to review
Section 5.6 and posting comments, I would appreciate it.

Also I'm still interested in any comments
on some of the high-level questions that I commented on in my last note:

I think the goal of the Abstract Interfaces
section is to provide a platform-independent model of the types of components
that UIMA developers can implement (e.g., Flow Controller, Analyzer, CAS
Multiplier) and the operations supported by these components.  This
lays the foundation for more concrete interface specifications such as
WSDL definitions and corresponding SOAP and Java bindings.  

As far as "what is the spec element
trying to acheive in terms of interoperability?", it seems that this
spec element doesn't really provide out-of-the-box interoperability (that
comes later with SOAP bindings for example), but is nonetheless important
for defining a common vocabulary and model for UIMA.  If two systems
both implemented the Abstract Interfaces but did not share a common binding
to a programming model, they would not interoperate out-of-the-box, but
building an adapter between them would probably not be difficult.

It is a little unclear what to do about
"compliance points", since it is somewhat subjective what it
means to comply to an abstract model.  Right now the white paper does
not list any Candidate Compliance Points in section 5.6.  We'll need
to decide if that is correct.  I'm interested to know what the other
group members think, as they read through the section, about what we can
say regarding compliance points.

Regards,
  -Adam
_____________________________
 Adam Lally
 Advisory Software Engineer 
 UIMA Framework Lead Developer
 IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
 Hawthorne, NY, 10532
 Tel: 914-784-7706,  T/L: 863-7706
 alally@us.ibm.com

Adam Lally/Watson/IBM

02/16/2007 02:28 PM

To	ehn@cs.cmu.edu, rankov_alex@emc.com, adrian.miley@mileywatts.com, jonathan.d.michel@saic.com
cc	uima@lists.oasis-open.org, carl.madson@sri.com, kano@is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp, nltngan@is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp, Sophia.ananiadou@manchester.ac.uk, j.tsujii@manchester.ac.uk
Subject	[Abstract Interfaces Sub-Group] Getting Started

Hi all,

I'd like to start things going for the
Abstract Interfaces Sub-Group of the UIMA TC.  According to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uima/download.php/22325/UIMA%20TC%20Sub-Groups_v2.pdf,
the members are:

myself, Adam Lally (group -leader)
Alex Rankov
Jon Michel
Adrian Miley
Eric Nyberg

(For this first email I addressed it
to the group members directly, and cc'ed the full UIMA TC mailing list,
just so it was more clear who I am intending this for.  However in
the future we can probably just write to the list and use the [Abstract
Interfaces Sub-Group] label in the subject.)

Our report date is Friday, March 16.
  That is four weeks from today.  We are tasked with reviewing
section 5.6 Abstract Interfaces in the white paper, and producing a 1-3
page report for presentation on the UIMA TC telecon on that date.

Based on Dave Ferrucci's email, our
report should cover the following things:

1. Goals of spec element. (What is it
trying to achieve in terms of interoperability?) 
2. Overall Critique of section. High-level summary of findings. How good/bad
is it in meeting goals? What's the damage? Looks good, just needs some
wordsmithing, has some serious conceptual issues, etc.
3. "Votable" issues. Crisp
decisions the TC should vote on required to harden/complete spec element.
4. Open-Issues. Issues that need extended discussion to resolve
5. List of compliance points. What aspects of this spec element "can",
"must" be adhered to in order to  be "compliant"
6. Action Plan. Very important -- List of tasks required to bring spec
element to completion. 


How does the following schedule sound
to the group?
        One
week for everyone to read Section 5.6 of the whitepaper and submit comments.
(Submit comments by 2/23, in email, or hopefully, we'll have a Wiki
set up by then.)
        Two
weeks for general discussion of everyone's comments and to identify items
to be included in report.  
        One
week to do a  final write up of the report.



I can kick-off the discussion with some
comments about the "Goals of the spec element":

I think the goal of the Abstract Interfaces
section is to provide a platform-independent model of the types of components
that UIMA developers can implement (e.g., Flow Controller, Analyzer, CAS
Multiplier) and the operations supported by these components.  This
lays the foundation for more concrete interface specifications such as
WSDL definitions and corresponding SOAP and Java bindings.  

As far as "what is the spec element
trying to acheive in terms of interoperability?", it seems that this
spec element doesn't really provide out-of-the-box interoperability (that
comes later with SOAP bindings for example), but is nonetheless important
for defining a common vocabulary and model for UIMA.  If two systems
both implemented the Abstract Interfaces but did not share a common binding
to a programming model, they would not interoperate out-of-the-box, but
building an adapter between them would probably not be difficult.

It is a little unclear what to do about
"compliance points", since it is somewhat subjective what it
means to comply to an abstract model.  Right now the white paper does
not list any Candidate Compliance Points in section 5.6.  We'll need
to decide if that is correct.  I'm interested to know what the other
group members think, as they read through the section, about what we can
say regarding compliance points.


That's all for now.  As you read
throught the whitepaper, if something is not clear please send questions
to the list, and I can try to clarify what it was we meant when we wrote
that.

Regards,
  -Adam


_____________________________
 Adam Lally
 Advisory Software Engineer 
 UIMA Framework Lead Developer
 IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
 Hawthorne, NY, 10532
 Tel: 914-784-7706,  T/L: 863-7706
 alally@us.ibm.com