On 05/10/2011 10:13 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: >> [package names vs. type hierarchy]
For a technically-oriented user, the package names are probably better. But for a linguist or knowledge-engineer, I am pretty sure that the inheritance hierarchy is more interesting. One dives down to the particular level one to which he can still make a distinction and then stops.
Yes, I guess that depends how you use the inheritance. In our case we go from the general UIMA Annotation to our own generic Annotation type that adds a few features, then the generic "manual" Annotation with features specific to human annotations, etc. So the inheritance is purely technical and implies no semantic hierarchy, and it makes no sense at all to a human annotator to go through all those levels that are completely meaningless to them.
I think it would be good to offer both approaches, maybe on different key-bindings and/or different sub menus reachable from the context menu.
I agree that maintaining the old behaviour for your use case makes sense, so we would need either two menus or a project-wide preference.
Jens
