Mailing-List: contact user-help@uima.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@uima.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
Subject: Re: RUTA variable assignment problem
From: Mario Gazzo <mario.gazzo@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <561CCB0C.1020308@averbis.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:17:34 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <475FC3CC-BDCD-40A9-84A4-6D0940ADA017@gmail.com>
References: <1C21AED0-4FE9-45C5-8303-DE602C6CABB4@gmail.com>
 <561CCB0C.1020308@averbis.com>
To: user@uima.apache.org

Hi Peter,

Thank you for answering. I fully understand that you may both be busy =
and that systems can come in between sometimes. I am subscribing to the =
user list though.

Regarding your question. There is only a single MatchedRegexAnnotation =
in that example, which is the one that gets assigned to the variable. =
There a two variables in the other example I send but they should =
reference two different annotations but the CREATE method ends up =
assigning the same value to the features. All the issues I had so far of =
this type involve the CREATE method, which sometimes appears erratic =
about when and how it captures variables and types.

When you say "the scope of the match of the rule element" then I like to =
understand how you define scope in the different cases. E.g. is a =
variable defined in the =E2=80=9Cglobal" script space always visible =
also within BLOCK statements? Are all matches of different rule elements =
within a BLOCK in the same scope? Is there a clear difference between =
scope and any matched annotation context since it seems that variables =
can be local when declared in a BLOCK but are they available just =
because I match the same area in another BLOCK?

I would ideally like to create small executable examples that can =
reproduce my problems but I don=E2=80=99t think I get the time this week =
anymore. I will keep my line open though and answer any questions you =
might have ASAP.

Cheers
Mario


> On 13 Oct 2015, at 11:12 , Peter Kl=C3=BCgl <peter.kluegl@averbis.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> sorry for the delayed response. I received your mail just yesterday.
> Maybe your mail needed to be moderated. Did you subscribe to the user =
list?
>=20
> Here's a first short answer. I will try to look into it in more =
details
> if this does not help:
>=20
> The CREATE action searches for annotations (that should be assigned to =
a
> feature) within the scope of the match of the rule element.
>=20
> Is there an annotation of the type MatchedRegexAnnotation within the
> offsets of the annotation of the type SomeOtherMatch? ... e.g., is
> SomeOtherMatch overlapping UniqueMatch?
>=20
> Maybe CREATE is not the correct action for you. Unfortunately, for
> filling feature for distant annotations there is currently only the
> GATHER action. This will hopefully change with ruta 2.4.0.
>=20
> I will try to find the time to take a look at your second mail later
> this day (or tomorrow).
>=20
> Best,
>=20
> Peter
>=20
>=20
> Am 09.10.2015 um 15:41 schrieb Mario Juric:
>> Hi,
>>=20
>> I have a annotation type variable that I am assigning a value in a =
statement block and then use that value in match rule to set the =
attribute in a new annotation like this:
>>=20
>> Type myvar;
>>=20
>> BLOCK(ForEach) UniqueMatch{} { // Capturing unique scope with this
>>    =E2=80=9CSome (\\w+) Regex" -> 1 =3D MatchedRegexAnnotation;
>>    MatchedRegexAnnotation { -> ASSIGN(myvar, =
MatchedRegexAnnotation)};
>> }
>>=20
>> SomeOtherMatch{} {
>> 	-> CREATE(Markup, =E2=80=9Cmyprop=E2=80=9D =3D myvar)
>> };
>>=20
>> The =E2=80=9Cmyprop=E2=80=9D attribute never gets a value even though =
the MatchedRegexAnnotation is created. A completely analog =
implementation appears to work flawlessly in another context but not in =
the current.
>>=20
>> I am in the dark about this and my Ruta skills are sill infant so any =
idea to what could be the problem is much appreciated.
>>=20
>> Cheers
>> Mario
>=20