[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-2339?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13189806#comment-13189806
]
Peter Klügl commented on UIMA-2339:
-----------------------------------
This problem is probably already fixed by the new implementation of the rule
inference.
Tested functionality with following input+script:
"Peter, Jochen, Flo und Georg."
PACKAGE org.apache.uima;
DECLARE WeightedItem;
DECLARE WeightedItem TreeNode, TreeLeaf;
DECLARE TreeNode CurrentRoot;
CW{ -> MARK(TreeNode)};
PM{ -> MARK(TreeLeaf)};
TreeNode{-> MARK(CurrentRoot)} SW;
CW{->UNMARK(CurrentRoot)};
WeightedItem;
TreeNode;
TreeLeaf;
CurrentRoot;
> TextMarker matching on parent types with additional removed grandchild
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: UIMA-2339
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-2339
> Project: UIMA
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: TextMarker
> Reporter: Peter Klügl
> Assignee: Peter Klügl
> Priority: Minor
>
> Matching on parent types with additional removed grandchilds works only for
> annotations that weren't covered by the grandchilds.
> Example:
> DECLARE WeightedItem TreeNode, TreeLeaf;
> DECLARE TreeNode CurrentRoot;
> ... some MARK(TreeNode) and MARK(TreeLeaf)
> ... some MARK(CurrentNode) additionally on TreeNodes
> ... some UNMARK(CurrentNode)
> then...
> WeightedItem matches only on FSs that weren't covered by the CurrentNode.
> Solution:
> Match explicitly on the leaf types TreeNode and TreeLeaf instead of
> WeightedItem.
--
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
