uima-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Kl├╝gl <pklu...@uni-wuerzburg.de>
Subject Re: Ruta partofneq
Date Fri, 13 Feb 2015 21:18:58 GMT
This should work just fine and should remove both contained annotations.

I just tested it with the current trunk and the following script:

DECLARE T1;
"A B" -> T1;
"B" -> T1;
"B" -> T1;

(T1{-> UNMARK(T1)}){PARTOFNEQ(T1)};

If applied on the test "A B", only the largest annotation remains.

Can you test it with the current trunk in case I fixed the bug a few 
minutes ago by accident. If not, can you give me more information about 
the context of your rule?

Best,

Peter

Am 12.02.2015 um 10:12 schrieb Silvestre Losada:
> I dont know if this is a bug or if it is wokring well. I have the following
> annotations.
>
> AnnotationA
>       begin:0
>       ends:8
>        id:1
> AnnotationA
>       begin:4
>       ends:8
>        id:2
> AnnotationA
>       begin: 4
>       ends:8
>        id:3
>
> Then if apply the following ruta
>
> (AnnotationA{-> UNMARK(AnnotationA)}){PARTOFNEQ(AnnotationA)};
>
> The output is
> AnnotationA
>       begin:0
>       ends:8
>        id:1
> AnnotationA
>       begin: 4
>       ends:8
>        id:3
>
> I expect that annotations with id 2 and 3 will be removed. Is there any way
> to remove both
>
> Kind regards
>


Mime
View raw message