Review Comment:
The paper presents a tool for extracting, transforming, and loading data (RDF data), dubbed UnifiedViews. Using the tool, it is possible to define, execute, monitor, schedule, and share pipelines for converting raw data to linked data. The main components (backend and frontend) are introduced. Major part of paper presents projects where UnifiedViews is deployed.
The paper was submitted as 'Tools and Systems Report'. It is reviewed considering two dimensions: (1) Quality, importance, and impact of the described tool or system; and (2) Clarity, illustration, and readability of the describing paper, which shall convey to the reader both the capabilities and the limitations of the tool. In this case, the points listed below should be improved for accepting the paper.
UnifiedViews is not well presented. The aspects enumerated in the conclusion section (ability, flexibility, simplicity, …) are not highlighted in the paper. In a section, an example of defining, executing, debugging, monitoring, scheduling, and sharing a pipeline could be explored, explaining those aspects. In addition, an example could exemplify: “(1) the robustness of the pipeline execution engine, (2) THE usability of the graphical user interface, and (3) THE simplicity of new DPUs’ creation”.
Major part of paper (Section 4 with ~ 7 pages) is based on presenting projects using UnifiedViews. More information is needed. It could be done by summarizing the section and using a table, (each row with project information plus pipeline description - e.g., number of DPU and their types, execution periodicity, among other).
Other details:
- Pay attention on formatting the paper according to the IOS Press templates.
- What are the keywords?
- A formal definition of ETL framework is not given.
- What are the general ETL framework features?
- Which features are implemented in UnifiedViews?
- Which features are not implemented in UnifiedViews?
- The user interface of UnifiedViews is not depicted.
- The readability of Figure 1 should be improved. DPUs could be organized vertically, a Quality Assessor DPU should be added, and the legend for DPU types could be presented. In the figure, about the data flows' labels, are they always the same (output → input)?
- '(see Figure 2)' is used three times.
- Is it “...Clojure Language … write Closure functions.” or “...Clojure Language … write Clojure functions.”?
- Section 'Related Work' should be before section 'Conclusion'.
- It seems that something is missed between introduction and conclusion. Some statements from 'Introduction Section' could be revisited for discussing the conclusions.
- Section 'UnifiedViews in Research Projects' could be used as future works in section 'Conclusion'.
- Maybe, section 'Conclusion' could be renamed to 'Discussion and Future Works'.
- Rewrite the long sentences.
Examples of minor details (some of them):
- Standardize use of commas (as example: before term 'which').
- Is it 'data analysis' or 'data analyses'?
- Before an enumeration starting with (1), is recommended to use ':'. As example: '… involves the activities of: (1) getting the data from…'
|