Runefile syntax for multiple inputs and outputs about rune

[Michael-F-Bryan]

Concept 3 - YAML

image: "runicos/base"

pipeline:
  audio:
    capability: SOUND
    outputs:
    - type: i16
      dimensions: [16000]
    args:
      hz: 16000

  accelerometer:
    capability: ACCEL
    outputs:
    - type: f32
      dimensions: [128, 3]

  normalize:
    proc-block: "hotg-ai/rune#proc_blocks/normalize"
    inputs:
    - accelerometer
    outputs:
    - type: f32
      dimensions: [128, 3]

  model:
    model: "./model.tflite"
    inputs:
    - audio
    - accelerometer
    outputs:
    - type: f32
      dimensions: [4]

  label:
    proc-block: "hotg-ai/rune#proc_blocks/ohv_label"
    inputs:
    - model
    outputs:
    - type: utf8
    args:
      labels: ["Wing", "Ring", "Slope", "Unknown"]

  output:
    out: SERIAL
    inputs:
    - label

  debug:
    out: SERIAL
    inputs:
    - fft
    - model
    - label

[Michael-F-Bryan]

@delimbetov liked the idea of using YAML for our Runefile format and proposed a couple tweaks to the document structure:

Hi, I think that using existing languages is gonna be easier for everyone. Personally I like the yaml one, but I would like it even more if blocks were split instead of all of them being part of the pipeline. E.g.

image: "runicos/base"

capabilities:
  audio:
    capability: SOUND
    outputs:
    - type: i16
      dimensions: [16000]
    args:
      hz: 16000

  accelerometer:
    capability: ACCEL
    outputs:
    - type: f32
      dimensions: [128, 3]

procblocks:
  normalize:
    proc-block: "hotg-ai/rune#proc_blocks/normalize"
    inputs:
    - accelerometer
    outputs:
    - type: f32
      dimensions: [128, 3]

pipeline:
  model:
    model: "./model.tflite"
    inputs:
    - audio
    - accelerometer
    outputs:
    - type: f32
      dimensions: [4]

  label:
    proc-block: "hotg-ai/rune#proc_blocks/ohv_label"
    inputs:
    - model
    outputs:
    - type: utf8
    args:
      labels: ["Wing", "Ring", "Slope", "Unknown"]

outputs:
  output:
    out: SERIAL
    inputs:
    - label

  debug:
    out: SERIAL
    inputs:
    - fft
    - model
    - label

[Michael-F-Bryan]

After talking with @meelislootus yesterday I think our plan of attack should be to make some small tweaks to the Runefile syntax (i.e. concept 1) in the short term because we've already started putting out marketing material and docs with our current Runefile syntax. Then a month or two afterwards we can start to phase it out in favour of YAML (concept 3).

The two formats will be feature-for-feature identical, so it should be trivial to read in an old-style Runefile and output the YAML equivalent.

Akshay and @kthakore, what are your thoughts? This is an easy thing to implement in code but considering the Runefile will be the primary way people interact with Rune on a day-to-day basis, changing its syntax/format could have larger ramifications from a business perspective.

[kthakore]

I think the Yaml approach fits well in the space given. yaml can also be syntax checked on the client side. I an in favor of it!

[akshr]

Pretty late to the game, sorry, but ya YAML for me as well :) - it draws the same orchestration crowd as well! I think the short term concept 1 makes sense too, but maybe we can be careful with the community? Because post launch if we need to change this we need to communicate really well.