Hi Christian
I was mildly surprised to find that both our submissions were declined, but what really took me aback were the comments. Maybe you could provide some deeper insight into what lead to our talks
being declined? Please note that I’m not trying to question your choices, I’m really just rather confused and would like to know more about the selection process.
· Our
proposal “Industrial Grade Modeling with Xtext” was declined because “… [our] submission does not promise much new insights or special experiences.”.
o We
not only use Xtext in a way which is attested by itemis to be unparalleled, we have also largely extended both design time and runtime of the framework.
o How
do the following accepted submissions “beat” our proposal?
§ “DESAGN
- Xtext at the cutting edge” - They write that they have created two languages using xtext in a talk at beginner level, so the way I understand their submission, they are merely using the framework and employ a rather limited part of it’s functionality – am
I wrong?
§ “Massively
Reducing the Effort to Test Xtext Languages” - presented in a BoF session last year. What new insights does it promise that our talk did not? (We went a step further and actually used DSLs to test our DSLs, so that we notice if something breaks – quite unlike
the presented approach using comments)
§ …
- I didn’t go on looking at the proposals, but at least some of them seemed to merit the above mentioned turn down reason more than ours did
· Our
proposal “Marrying JEE and OSGi using DSLs” was declined because “…we weren't able to figure out the exact connection to the Eclipse ecosystem of projects…”
o I
would have been glad if we had been contacted in order to clarify. We depend explicitly on EclipseLink and we develop / build and deploy in a heavily leveraged Eclipse environment.
Best regards, see you at Ludwigsburg,
Chris
