Adam Lally wrote:
On 12/22/06, Adam Lally <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/22/06, Marshall Schor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Re: What to do about Document Annotation for 2.1.
>
> a) Do the work to make it easy to get singletons (or whatever we're
> calling this feature) out of the CAS
>
> b) Change JCasGen to not generate DocumentAnnotation if the merged
> version = the base
>
> c) Add the DocumentAnnotation jar back to the build, with instructions
> to remove it from the
> deployment and substitute a JCasGenerated one if the application
needs a
> special one.
>
> I've may have forgotten some point(s) - does this address the issues?
My only complaints are that I think it is ugly to have a
uima-jcas-builtin-types.jar (or uima-document-annotation.jar or
whatever its called) that has just this one class in it, and I think
this this is a dangerous feature that users can hang themselves with.
But, I suppose I can live with this solution... keeping support for
the feature so we don't break compatibility, but putting sufficient
warnings in to do our best to keep users from hanging themselves with
it.
I do think that it seems like an improvement to not generate a new
version of DocumentAnnotation if the merged version = the base. Why
didn't we think of that before?
I created a JIRA issue for this.
I'm pretty sure (a) is still controversial, and I suppose not strictly
needed for v2.1. I'll post on a separate thread to at least get the
ball rolling.
For (c) I think I will have to create a new component
uimaj-document-annotation that has just the one Java class
(org.apache.uima.jcas.tcas.DocumentAnnotation) in it, and which builds
into uimaj-document-annotation.jar. It's a little ugly but I haven't
heard a better suggestion. Agreed?
-Adam
Right now, it seems to be the only way. Fine with me.
What about the documentation. I think we should add a paragraph about
the uimaj-document-annotation.jar and how it should be used/replaced.
There is already a chapter in the documentation writing about issues
with the document annotation, but this mainly talks about the extension
class loader issues.
-- Michael
