You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently, if we apply two annotators which annotate the same element, both are added to the result. Stanford CoreNLP instead overrides the old annotation. Following this, I implemented a method that checks whether there already exist the same elements when adding XML elements. Such duplicate occurs, e.g., when running a joint parser of POS and tree after applying POS tagger.
I plan to push this modification but I was also wondering this overriding method is the best way to resolve conflicts. Maybe it's better also to output some warnings, but this may be future work.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I've changed this behavior of cabocha in d17b751 to remain the old annotation, because now annotator name (cabocha) is recorded on every element.
It may be better to support some option to decide whether leaving or replacing the old annotation as in -knp.replaceJumanTokens.
Generally, remaining the same type of annotations with different annotators seems to make the lower-level processing a bit complicated, so the default behavior might be better to replace the old annotation.
Currently, if we apply two annotators which annotate the same element, both are added to the result. Stanford CoreNLP instead overrides the old annotation. Following this, I implemented a method that checks whether there already exist the same elements when adding XML elements. Such duplicate occurs, e.g., when running a joint parser of POS and tree after applying POS tagger.
I plan to push this modification but I was also wondering this overriding method is the best way to resolve conflicts. Maybe it's better also to output some warnings, but this may be future work.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: