Yeah, but won't my additions be destroyed the next time I modify the XML file and regenerate the typesystem?
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 10:58 AM Marshall Schor <m...@schor.com> wrote: > Even though the JCas classes can be generated from the XML file, you are > allowed > to add additional things to those source files, including > > - additional fields > > - additional methods > > See > > http://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.10.4/references.html#ugr.ref.jcas.augmenting_generated_code > > -Marshall > > On 11/15/2019 9:50 AM, Alain Désilets wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 4:51 PM Richard Eckart de Castilho < > r...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >> Sure. You generate the JCas classes once and then you add the methods > you > >> want > >> to them. Cf. e.g. > >> > >> > >> > https://github.com/dkpro/dkpro-core/blob/8043e10bf10a61fe47e21946ea609bda9f2278a0/dkpro-core-api-metadata-asl/src/main/java/de/tudarmstadt/ukp/dkpro/core/api/metadata/type/DocumentMetaData.java#L290-L447 > > > > I know how to create a subclass of Annotation, RelationAnnotation in my > > case. The problem is that if I try to use this subclass in an Annotator, > > UIMA complains that RelationAnnotation is not in the UIMA type system, > and > > it lists the available types. This list is essentially the list of types > > defined in some UIMA xml file. This tells me that only those annotation > > classes defined in the xml file can be used in an Annotator. Or at least, > > that I am missing a step for registering my RelationAnnotation class with > > the UIMA type system. > > > > On the other hand, if I define the RelationAnnotation in the xml file, I > > can use it in an Annotator but then I can't figure out how to add methods > > to it, since the Java source for that class is generated automatically > (by > > some UIMA maven plugin I presume). > > > > But the question is: why do you want to add new methods? (and is it > really > >> a good idea?) > >> > > Essentially, I want to add methods for "derived attributes", i.e. > > attributes whose values are computed from primitive attributes defined in > > the xml file. > > > > I guess I could make those attributes be primitve (i.e. defined in the > xml > > file), but then, any annotator that creates a RelationAnnotation would > have > > to make sure to set those other attributes correctly. I would much rather > > have the RelationAnnotation class compute those derived attributes > itself, > > as it garantees that they will always be computed the same way. > > > > Alain > > >
