|
SIGMOD 2008
2008 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data
June 9-12 2008
Vancouver
Canada
|
Aggregates over review questions.
| Min Is this paper relevant to the Industrial Track? I.e., is it about commercial information management software, or about industrial-strength prototypes of information management software in widespread use? | 0 |
| Avg Overall rating | 2.00 |
| Spread Overall rating | 4 |
|
Review: 1 |
|
Reviewer:
| Jan Pedersen |
|
Email:
| jpederse@yahoo-inc.com |
|
Organization:
| Yahoo! Inc |
|
Review:
| |
| | Question | Response |
| 1 | Is this paper relevant to the Industrial Track? I.e., is it about commercial information management software, or about industrial-strength prototypes of information management software in widespread use? |
Yes
|
| 2 | Originality: How novel is the work described? |
Slightly novel
|
| 3 | Technical Quality: How complete, deep, and correct is this work? |
Good
|
| 4 | Significance: How much can this paper teach the community? |
Some; community would benefit from reading
|
| 5 | Presentation: how readable is the paper? |
Good
|
| 6 | Overall rating |
Accept
|
| 7 | Reviewer confidence |
Low
|
| 8 | Justification for rating (max 3 lines, please) |
The authors present an efficient method for extracting tuples from streaming XML data. The performance results suggests that the proposed algorithm significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art.
|
| 9 | Detailed comments to authors: |
|
| 10 | Comments for PC (will not be seen by authors) |
|
| 11 | Name of external reviewer, if any: |
|
|
|
Review: 2 |
|
Reviewer:
| Eric Simon |
|
Email:
| esimon@businessobjects.com |
|
Organization:
| Business Objects |
|
Review:
| |
| | Question | Response |
| 1 | Is this paper relevant to the Industrial Track? I.e., is it about commercial information management software, or about industrial-strength prototypes of information management software in widespread use? |
No
|
| 2 | Originality: How novel is the work described? |
Slightly novel
|
| 3 | Technical Quality: How complete, deep, and correct is this work? |
Good
|
| 4 | Significance: How much can this paper teach the community? |
Some; community would benefit from reading
|
| 5 | Presentation: how readable is the paper? |
Good
|
| 6 | Overall rating |
Reject
|
| 7 | Reviewer confidence |
Medium
|
| 8 | Justification for rating (max 3 lines, please) |
This is a good research paper that improves the state of the art over previously published research papers on the topic. However, this paper does not qualify as an industrial paper.
|
| 9 | Detailed comments to authors: |
I strongly encourage you to submit your paper to the forthcoming VLDB 2008 research track.
|
| 10 | Comments for PC (will not be seen by authors) |
|
| 11 | Name of external reviewer, if any: |
|
|
|
Review: 3 |
|
Reviewer:
| Dana Florescu |
|
Email:
| dana.florescu@oracle.com |
|
Organization:
| Oracle Corporation |
|
Review:
| Not Available |
|
|