On 12/22/06, Marshall Schor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also why did you say "(when serializing)" - is it intended that this
> operation not be used for other purposes such as by an annotator?
This was me thinking that the main use-case for this is serialization, and
remembering you wanted to hide this from users because they might abuse it?

Actually I suggested that making this operation available to users was
a way of enabling access to FS in the CAS without knowledge of views,
which I liked.  The only operation I remember wanting to hide/disable
was something that added an FS to all views.


What I was trying to say was that there might be many annotation
indexes.  Each one might have a
"filter" saying that it should have annotations whose "sofa" was a
particular sofa, for example.

OK, I see, that seems better.


> Also, we have some uses of non-annotation indexes that are segregated
> by Sofa (say, a Lemma index that's particular to a Sofa, where there's
> actually no explicit link from the Lemma to the Sofa).  A filtering
> approach wouldn't work there,
It could be made to work by adding a feature to the Lemma type which was
a sofa reference.  But maybe that's asking too much of the user?

I'm not sure what is right here... this is a reasonable idea.  But I
think in the absence of a clear sense of what is best I lean towards
staying closer to where were currently are, which is to have view
where the user explicitly decides which view to index things in.


> So basically, is this equivalent to taking our current implemenation
> of View and saying that the sofa is optional? (Which is more or less
> what the UIMA spec says.)
Well, it allows 2 or more Sofas to be indexed using a single
index-set (i.e., in a single view), which
the current design doesn't.

My idea of how to do this would be to create a View without any Sofa
(a non-anchored view), and then you could add any annotations that you
want to it.  There's no restriction on adding annotations to a
non-anchored view, the only restriction that we might have would be on
adding annotations to the "wrong" anchored view.

-Adam

Reply via email to