Yes, most of our tools assume that tags are position independent, but I've come across a handful of languages that treat some tags as position dependent, and I was more hoping to make it official to make it less likely that we run into issues with that.
Also, I have an idea for how to make a version of lt-proc -g that accepts the tags in any order, which might be helpful for reducing generation errors, though it may turn out to be too much of a slowdown for production. Daniel On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 1:58 PM Kevin Brubeck Unhammer <unham...@fsfe.org> wrote: > > Daniel Swanson > <awesomeevildu...@gmail.com> čálii: > > > To be clear, I meant splitting <px1sg> into <px1><pxsg>. > > 👍 > > > One of my ideals for the tagset is that every tag be > > position-independent, so that the only reason I need to care about > > order is because of FST topology (and maybe not even then). > > Aren't the tags themselves already position-independent? Both CG and to > a certain extent transfer assume that. > _______________________________________________ > Apertium-stuff mailing list > Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff _______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
