The idea that one must remove a stock-UIMA jar and replace it with another was something I always thought a bit… well… ugly.
That link also doesn't say how to add features to it. Probably by defining the type in a XML. It seems a bit odd that section 5.5.3 (Impact of Type Merging on Composability of Annotators) pledges against type merging when 5.5.4 (Adding Features to DocumentAnnotation) says to use exactly that. -- Richard Am 08.05.2013 um 21:06 schrieb Marshall Schor <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > This is intended to be a singleton. But it is not "featureFinal" - so you can > define this exact type in your type system and have any additional features > you > need added to it (without making a subtype). > > See this section of the reference documentation: > http://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.4.0/references.html#ugr.ref.jcas.documentannotation_issues > > It is probably a good idea to add to the framework something that prevents > users > from creating subtypes or multiple instances of it. Patches welcome! > > -Marshall > > > On 5/8/2013 8:17 AM, Georg Fette wrote: >> Hello, >> I have a type system in which I have created a type which inherits from >> DocumentAnnotation. As DocumentAnnotation is not inheritanceFinal I thought >> that this is allowed. I have now a CAS in which I have several annotations of >> that derived type. In the method copyFSInner of CasCopier the proper target >> feature structure to copy instances of my type the first DocumentAnnotation >> in >> the index of documentAnnotation of the target CAS. Is DocumentAnnotation to >> be >> thought a singelton in a CAS ? Why isn't it prevented in the framework to >> derive from it or to create further instances of that type and add it to the >> CAS ? >> If this is done the CasCopier can not be properly used. >> Greetings >> Georg
