On 21 Dec 2010, at 12:04, Kevin Brubeck Unhammer <unham...@fsfe.org> wrote:
> Francis Tyers <fty...@prompsit.com> writes: > >> Hi! >> >> The problem with this is that there are so many different metadix >> formats that it will be impossible to come up with one that covers >> them >> all. For example if I remember correctly how the "alt" works is >> different in es-pt and in oc-es. I think it was decided that it was >> desirable to have them functioning differently, or at least would >> require substantial changes in either language pair to get a unified >> format -- changes that without some push (and let's face it, cash) >> are >> not going to get made. >> >> On the other hand, implementing compound words gives us the chance to >> strike while the iron is hot! We can make a (fairly innocuous >> change -- >> any language pair that does not have compounding will be unaffected) >> before getting a plethora of different options and thus avoiding the >> metadix problem for another set of issues. >> >> Btw, thinking about metadix I have some probably unpopular ideas, >> thatwould preclude any standardisation. I think that maybe we >> should not >> have one format, but rather many _codified_ formats depending on the >> language(group). For example how to include a verb would be >> different in >> Tajik and Dutch, because different things are important. Unnecessary >> examples: >> >> <e lm="aanzitten"><par n="z/itten__vblex" prefix="aan" >> pp="aangezeten"/></e> >> >> Giving: >> >> <e lm="aanzitten"><i>aanz</i><par n="aanz/itten__vblex_sep"/></e> >> <e lm="aanzitten"><p><l>z</l><r>aanz</r></p><par >> n="z/itten#_aan__vblex_sep"/><p><l><b/>aan</l><r></r></p></e> >> <e lm="aanzitten"><p><l>aangezeten</l><r>aanzitten</r></p><par >> n="gesproken__vblex_sep"/></e> >> >> Or in Tajik: >> >> <e lm="харидан"><par n="кард/ан__vblex" stem1="харид" stem2="хар"/ >> ></e> > > In the unification proposal from > > http://wiki.apertium.org/wiki/Unification_of_metadix_and_parametrized_dictionaries#A_unifying_proposal > > the calls would look like > > <e lm="aanzitten"><par n="z/itten__vblex" prms="prefix='aan' > pp='aangezeten'"/></e> > > and > > <e lm="харидан"><par n="кард/ан__vblex" prms="stem1='харид' stem2='х > ар'"/></e> > > > Are there good reasons not to go with that kind of syntax? The use of the apostrophe, for one thing. Makes it unworkable for several languages. The key/value pairs ought really to be expressed in an XML structure. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Lotusphere 2011 Register now for Lotusphere 2011 and learn how to connect the dots, take your collaborative environment to the next level, and enter the era of Social Business. http://p.sf.net/sfu/lotusphere-d2d _______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
