uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Charles de Saint-Aignan (JIRA)" <...@uima.apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (UIMA-2391) Uima type merging for string subtypes not working
Date Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:24:18 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-2391?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13262037#comment-13262037
] 

Charles de Saint-Aignan commented on UIMA-2391:
-----------------------------------------------

Are you saying that if we just don't put in any allowed values, then all values will be allowed?
 I'd rather have some level of control and not have to put in some additional code to do that.
 

On another note, it still seems like a bug to me that UIMA does not behave this way.  I think
adding this in would make it consistent with respect to the ability to merge features.
                
> Uima type merging for string subtypes not working
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: UIMA-2391
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-2391
>             Project: UIMA
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Core Java Framework
>    Affects Versions: 2.3.1AS
>         Environment: Linux on Power
>            Reporter: Charles de Saint-Aignan
>            Priority: Critical
>         Attachments: UIMA-2391.patch
>
>
> The basic situation is that we are providing a UIMA-based core that other teams can extend
to suit their needs.  As such we are making use of UIMA type merging to allow them to add
new features to existing types.  This approach works fine since JCasGen merges the two definitions
of the given type and produces a superset of the features.  This is well documented here:
> http://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.3.1/references.html#ugr.ref.jcas.merging_types.jcasgen_support

> However, in addition to this, we have the case where we have a string subtype with given
allowedValues - lets say values a, b and c.  The other team wants to extend this type and
have additional allowedValues, say value d.  Ideally, what I would like to do is the following
(which follows the pattern used for adding features):
> Type Definition #1 (provided by core):
>     <typeDescription>
>       <name>com.ibm.Type</name>
>       <description></description>
>       <supertypeName>uima.cas.String</supertypeName>
>       <allowedValues>
>         <value>
>           <string>a</string>
>           <description></description>
>         </value>
>         <value>
>           <string>b</string>
>           <description></description>
>         </value>
>         <value>
>           <string>c</string>
>           <description></description>
>         </value>
>       </allowedValues>
>     </typeDescription>	    
> Type Definition #2 (extension to core):
>     <typeDescription>
>       <name>com.ibm.Type</name>
>       <description></description>
>       <supertypeName>uima.cas.String</supertypeName>
>       <allowedValues>
>         <value>
>           <string>d</string>
>           <description></description>
>         </value>
>       </allowedValues>
>     </typeDescription>
> In this case I wanted UIMA to recognize the two definitions at runtime and allow the
superset of allowedValues.  However, this does not do the trick - at runtime UIMA throws an
exception saying that value d is not an allowed value for com.ibm.Type.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Mime
View raw message