[developers] Whoa, missed someting, sorry

[Ann Copestake]

kiefer at dfki.de said:
> What exactly are "the same options"?

There are a number of parameters which can be changed.  From what Yi says, it 
should be fine - I hope that at some point I'll get a chance to look at the 
PET behaviour but can't see that being soon.

kiefer at dfki.de said:
> So what exactly is necessary for the MRS->RMRS conversion? 

I hope that's reasonably clear from the papers/reports (the Lisp code to do it 
is reasonably well commented).  One thing - as far as the description of RMRS 
goes, I suggest looking at the paper in last year's deep grammar workshop at 
ACL.  The conversion from MRS is quite a lot simpler for the version of RMRS 
that does not have INGs, which is the one I would advocate these days and is 
described in that paper.

> Which one
> contains more information, or are they not comparable?

It is always possible to convert MRS -> RMRS, given suitable feature/value 
mappings.  Vice versa is only possible for a subset of RMRSs.

kiefer at dfki.de said:
> At the moment, we have to keep in synch with the changing versions of  ecl
> and the numerous problems that must be circumvented. And as long as  we have
> only one (or maybe two) formats to support, this should be  doable. The rest
> would (hopefully) just be converters from this format,  which could be
> shared?

how were you thinking they would be shared?  currently there is Lisp code to 
do the various formats, so if someone writes a convertor, the Lisp code would 
have to call that if we share the convertor?  I'm not yet convinced this would 
make the overall maintenance load easier ...

Best,

Ann