uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Klügl <pklu...@uni-wuerzburg.de>
Subject Re: uimaFIT on the website
Date Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:51:35 GMT
btw, I still have an open issue that the ruta page is somehow broken in
some environments. Richard, did you observe any problems with the uima
FIT page, and do you still have problems with the ruta page? Do you know
of any differences?


On 03.09.2013 10:35, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback. I fixed the things that were quick to fix
> and leave the larger changes for later :)
> @Peter: I noticed btw. that the Ruta documentation is also not linked
> from the documentation page.
> -- Richard
> Am 03.09.2013 um 07:03 schrieb Marshall Schor <msa@schor.com>:
>> I had a look and it looks basically fine to me.
>> Here are a couple thoughts I had when reading the main uimaFIT website.
>> 1) I think it would be good to post the docbook and apiDocs documentation for
>> uimaFIT on the website.  (You should be able to add the .../d/uimaFIT  etc
>> docs to the the existing docs/d/... spot).
>> Then you could link to this from 2 places: one is the uimaFIT page, and the
>> other could be the Documentation page.  The idea would be to have a new person
>> landing on uimaFIT page, reading it, and wanting to do the "next steps" to learn
>> more, to have somewhere to click.
>> 2) We should consider updating the main UIMA website page, add uimaFIT (and
>> Ruta) to the picture, and say a few words with hyperlinks about these projects.
>> One more minor thing - the convention for the (TM) trademark symbol is to use it
>> once, the first time a trademarked thing appears.  Repetition of this beyond
>> that starts to make the doc look cluttered with these things.  In this case, I
>> think the first use of Apache UIMA and the first use of Apache uimaFIT (only)
>> would be TM'd.
>> Just my 2 cents. Cheers. -Marshall
>> On 8/31/2013 5:15 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> uimaFIT and Ruta are both officially part of the UIMA sandbox - at least in SVN.
>>> On the website, Ruta has been added on the left navigation menu on the same level
>>> Annotators, Tools & Servers, etc. It is also listed in the Sandbox section.
>>> I have added uimaFIT to the left navigation menu as well now. Contrary to other
>>> sandbox components, both uimaFIT and Ruta have rather large "project" pages.
>>> Also, Ruta is listed as a separate download in the downloads section. I've added
>>> uimaFIT there as well now.
>>> I'm not sure where this is going, but it's probably something we should discuss.
>>> Should uimaFIT and Ruta be removed from the navigation bar and just end up on
>>> sandbox page? 
>>> Actually, looking at the nav section, there's loads of developer
>>> information, but the stuff users are interested in, e.g. components and tools
>>> is comparatively underrepresented/small. The "Annotators" and "Addons & Sandbox"
>>> links basically link to the same place, although being two different items in
>>> navigation. Similarly, some things are listed under "tools" and again under "addons".
>>> Should there be something like "featured" sub-projects?
>>> How are downloads for sandbox projects handled when they get their own release
>>> cycle? As separate downloads on the downloads page (as now) or somehow different?
>>> And of course… is the uimaFIT page ok? (http://uima.apache.org/uimafit.html)
>>> I'll hold off the release announcement mail until I get some feedback on these
>>> questions.
>>> Cheers,
>>> -- Richard

View raw message