Right now, developing unification-based rules is made more difficult because the web interface does not support unification (although for many languages unification features are predefined). One cannot also provide definitions of unification features because the online editor assumes that the code in the editor is just one <rule> element.
The fix should be fairly trivial: just add parts of the XML file that include unification features to the normal template of XML rules (which need to be generated from a template anyway to make them valid).
Why is this relevant? Because some unification rules (for disagreement) are likely to cause tons of false alarms in their early versions.
Right now, developing unification-based rules is made more difficult because the web interface does not support unification (although for many languages unification features are predefined). One cannot also provide definitions of unification features because the online editor assumes that the code in the editor is just one
<rule>
element.The fix should be fairly trivial: just add parts of the XML file that include unification features to the normal template of XML rules (which need to be generated from a template anyway to make them valid).
Why is this relevant? Because some unification rules (for disagreement) are likely to cause tons of false alarms in their early versions.