Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-uima-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-uima-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 607CCEC84 for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 11:24:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 76835 invoked by uid 500); 14 Dec 2012 11:24:52 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-uima-user-archive@uima.apache.org Received: (qmail 76573 invoked by uid 500); 14 Dec 2012 11:24:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@uima.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@uima.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@uima.apache.org Received: (qmail 76556 invoked by uid 99); 14 Dec 2012 11:24:52 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 11:24:52 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [132.187.3.35] (HELO mailrelay.rz.uni-wuerzburg.de) (132.187.3.35) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 11:24:44 +0000 Received: from virusscan-slb.rz.uni-wuerzburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailrelay-slb.rz.uni-wuerzburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 543C276F4C for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:24:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by virusscan-slb.rz.uni-wuerzburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5303176F4A for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:24:23 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at uni-wuerzburg.de Received: from mailmaster.uni-wuerzburg.de ([10.101.19.1]) by localhost (vmail002.slb.uni-wuerzburg.de [10.101.19.142]) (amavisd-new, port 10225) with ESMTP id f7ct8ra9Uhg1 for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:24:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.178.76] (dslb-084-056-074-216.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.56.74.216]) by mailmaster.uni-wuerzburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 353F17ABDD for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:24:23 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <50CB0C66.6020103@uni-wuerzburg.de> Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:24:22 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Peter_Kl=FCgl?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: user@uima.apache.org Subject: Re: TextMARKER Block statement References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, No, you are completely right and that should work just fine. Normally, if something like this happens, then it is caused by the filtering setting. Have you checked if the head rule of the block (Sentence) tries to match on all sentences? Just debug the script in the Workbench, open the output cas and switch to the "Explain" perspective. Maybe some of them are not visible. If this is not the problem, then I need an example to reproduce it. Best, Peter Am 14.12.2012 11:36, schrieb Sergey Serebryakov: > Hi! > > I have a question regarding TextMARKER Block statement. I want some of the > rules that I have developed to be applied only within the scope of > particular parent annotations (for instance, for each sentence annotation). > As I could understand, BLOCK statement is what can be used for it. I am > using the following construction: > > BLOCK(Sentences) Sentence{} { > // rule 1 > // rule 2 > // ... > } > > where Sentence is the name of the annotation that is used to annotate > sentences. > > As a result, these rules (rule 1, rule 2 ...) are only applied for the > first sentence despite the fact there there many more sentences in the > document. Am i missing something in a way how BLOCK statement works? > > Thank you. > > Best regards, > Sergey. >