Hi,
Am 12.07.2017 um 18:35 schrieb Sumit Madan: > Am 06.07.2017 um 18:00 schrieb Peter Klügl: >> Hi, > > Hi Peter, > >> I cannot reproduce the problem. So you have maybe a small runnable test? > > I've created a small runnable test with DKPro (1.8.0) and Ruta > (2.6.0). I've to say that I'm also unable to reproduce the problem. > All block constructs are working just fine in the runnable test. > > For the documents that we process in our internal pipeline, which is > mostly identical to the runnable test, the block constructs on Lemma > type are not working. The pipeline uses our own internal type system. > I've tried to do some debugging but not able to find the problem. A > characteristic of our pipeline is that we work on a different view > than _InitialView. I've also considered this aspect in the runnable test. > > As I cannot provide you the source code of the internal pipeline, > we've created a minimal serialized CAS with debug types. May be you > can identify the problem in the CAS? (The serialized CAS has been sent > to your private email address.) > > The applied rules: > ### > BLOCK(forEACH) Lemma{}{ > Lemma{->MATCHEDTEXT(s), ASSIGN(a,contains(s,"er"))}; > Lemma{a ->Value1}; > } > ### > I'll take a look. Could take a few days until I get back to you. > Another small issue: DebugRuleApply.element doesn't always match with > the original rules. For example, for the second rule, it contains the > value "Lemma{->MATCHEDTEXT(s, ),ASSIGN(a, contains(s))};", which is > not identical to the user input. > Yes, unfortunately I did not really take care of it since it is only debug info. I assume you are referring to the comma? I'll fix that. Let me know if you observe more. Best, Peter >> >> Best, >> >> >> Peter >> >> >> >> Am 31.05.2017 um 14:18 schrieb Sumit Madan: >>> Am 31.05.2017 um 13:26 schrieb Sumit Madan: >>>> Am 31.05.2017 um 09:59 schrieb Peter Klügl: >>>>> Hi, >>>> Hi Peter, >>>> >>>>> Am 30.05.2017 um 19:35 schrieb Sumit Madan: >>>>>> We were not able to access the annotation within the BLOCK. >>>>>> >>>>>> ### >>>>>> STRING s; >>>>>> BOOLEAN a ; >>>>>> >>>>>> // This is not working for us: >>>>>> BLOCK(forEACH) Lemma{}{ >>>>>> Lemma{->MATCHEDTEXT(s), ASSIGN(a,contains(s,"er"))}; >>>>>> Lemma{a ->Test1}; >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> // This is working: >>>>>> BLOCK(forEACH) Lemma{}{ >>>>>> W{->MATCHEDTEXT(s), ASSIGN(a,contains(s,"er"))}; >>>>>> W{a ->Test2}; >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> // This is also working: >>>>>> BLOCK(forEACH) Lemma{}{ >>>>>> Document{->MATCHEDTEXT(s), ASSIGN(a,contains(s,"er"))}; >>>>>> Document{a ->Test3}; >>>>>> } >>>>>> ### >>>>>> >>>>> All three examples should work. Which ruta version do you use? It >>>>> looks >>>>> like a bug. >>>> Lisa is testing again and will get back to you. >>> We tested it again and can confirm the following: >>> >>> ### >>> STRING s; >>> BOOLEAN a ; >>> >>> // This is not working: >>> BLOCK(forEACH1) Lemma{} { // Matches a lot >>> Lemma{->MATCHEDTEXT(s), ASSIGN(a,contains(s,"er"))}; // Matches 0 >>> Lemma{a ->Test1}; >>> } >>> >>> // This is not working: >>> BLOCK(forEACH2) Lemma{} { // Matches a lot >>> Lemma{contains(Lemma.ct, "er") -> MARK(Test2)}; // Matches 0 >>> } >>> >>> // This is working: >>> Lemma{contains(Lemma.ct, "er") -> MARK(Test3)}; // Matches 1 >>> >>> // This is working: >>> BLOCK(forEACH4) Lemma{}{ >>> W{->MATCHEDTEXT(s), ASSIGN(a,contains(s,"er"))}; // Matches 1 >>> W{a ->Test4}; >>> } >>> >>> // This is also working: >>> BLOCK(forEACH5) Lemma{}{ >>> Document{->MATCHEDTEXT(s), ASSIGN(a,contains(s,"er"))}; // >>> Matches 1 >>> Document{a ->Test5}; >>> } >>> ### >>> >>> Is it possible that in a BLOCK only Ruta types are available? >>> >>> We are using the latest stable version 2.6.0. >>> > >