IBM Data and AI Ideas Portal for Customers
This portal is to open public enhancement requests against products and services offered by the IBM Data & AI organization. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
Shape the future of IBM!
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Search existing ideas
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post your ideas
Post ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted and upvote them if they matter to you,
Post an idea
Upvote ideas that matter most to you
Get feedback from the IBM team to refine your idea
Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
IBM Data & AI Roadmaps (http://ibm.biz/Data-and-AI-Roadmaps) - Use this site to view roadmaps for Data & AI products.
IBM Employees should enter Ideas at https://hybridcloudunit-internal.ideas.aha.io/
I logged again https://ibmwatsondataplatform.ideas.aha.io/ideas/IBMWDP-I-218
since it was deleted when I asked to remove the link with this wish
Agree with Alain that these are 2 separate ideas that should not be merged: one idea around a visual guided NL interface, and another idea around an OPL IDE inside DSX.
These 2 ideas are not related at all! They should be unmerged.
One is about better support of OPL in DSX, as a transition for current OR experts using OPL to DSX.
The other is about NL assistant being currently limited to a small subset of problems (scheduling problems) and this items suggests we extend this more domains and problems.
You try to interprete this feedback to be a support of OPL but it is not. It is saying that NL is good as a non coding optimization experiences, but it needs to be extended to more domains.
maybe this is related to this https://ibmwatsondataplatform.ideas.aha.io/ideas/IBMWDP-I-181
as long as optimisation model creation is concerned, you can't spare some type of "coding" = converting the business problem to a set of math inequalities, goals = optimizastion model.
so the simpler the language you can do that (i.e. closer to the actual math equations) the better. However, what I'd optimally see is a SPSS Modeler type of GUI where tons of NON-optimisation related functions are either drag&drop (e.g. DB connectors, some type of scripting logic, visualization of data/solution)) or simple clicking type of things (like project management), where the only thing the optimizastion modeler has to really "code" is the declarative model (prefereably in OPL, not in an API-based GPL).
Dumbledore, in fact does not help/improve the modeling experience itself as it is providing python API for modeling only. This means 4 things
A. users of other language investments (OPL, Java, etc) can't use it
B. as a consequence Python has to be learned
C. whatever it comes with python has to be accepted (e.g. performance = other packages has to be downloaded to improve it)
D. whever a new thing arrives the investment has to be repreated in the new thing >>> e.g. GO was created in Google even if the Python creator worked for there for years. Different things (= languages) are good for something and not so good for something else = humans are advacing since we specialize not the other way around, that is, to search for the magical "hammer" who can screw-drive, drill, and hammer and the same time with the same efficiency... :-)
so as a general idea in the light of my comment (and assuming the first line highlightling the connection to an obvioulsy similar/same request in spirit) above I vote for this as well...