Am 17.04.2014 15:01, schrieb Eddie Epstein: > Hi Peter, > > The logic is that since a sofa aware component may have one or > more input and/or output views, such a component needs to use > getView to specify which to use. > > For sofa aware delegates, sofa mapping enables the delegate to > hard wire input and/or output View names in annotator code (or > annotator config parameters) and then have the real View names > assigned via mapping in the aggregate.
Is the real view name in the mapping important at all since the view get accessed by the implementation in the process() method? I don't see the effect of the mapping to the default input view of an sofa aware AE without input view capabilities at all. The mapping says view1 is linked, but another one arrives. So, the best practice is to introduce a parameter for specifying the input view? In case that the AE implementation should be used several times in an AAE for different views. Peter > Eddie > > > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Peter Klügl <pklu...@uni-wuerzburg.de>wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> as I understand the implementation, an AE is sofa aware if it specifies >> input or output views in its capabilities. Let's say it only specifies >> an output view, so it's sofa aware. If it is part of an AAE with sofa >> mapping (one AAE sofa mapped to the default input view of the AE), then >> it get passed the base CAS independently of the sofa mapping. Shouldn't >> it get the view mapped in the AAE? >> >> I have a simple AE that should just get the mapped sofa as input and >> then should create a new view, which name is given by a parameter. Is >> it correct that I have to introduce another parameter for the input view >> and have to "getView" in the AE? Is there no way to just use the mapped >> sofa? >> >> Best, >> >> Peter >> >> >>
