Jancs wrote: > I can not get the point of importance of such questions. Of > course, the quality of dictionary is important, statistic by > itself is very interesting science for one or another, but what > effect could have comparison of some specific metrics between > different languages? Measurement of work quality of dic > developer? I think, mostly they (we) are unpaid volunteers doing > theit work as good as they can and as such they deserve more > appreciation then torture by quality measurement of hardly > comparable things.
I'm also an unpaid volunteer. That doesn't mean I don't value my own time. I think of myself as a millionaire who pays a salary to myself for doing volunteer work, and I want good value for money. So I try to evaluate if my work is efficient. If I should find that your (or my) work is less efficient than it should be, that is not an accusation. I think we all have the ability to learn new and better ways to work. The prerequisite is that we know how to measure the benefit of what we do. For quite some time, I have scanned old books in Project Runeberg (runeberg.org) and it is easy to see how many pages I can scan per hour, and if some new method or equipment can increase this. Also for quite some time, I have been adding words to a spelling dictionary, but it is very hard to know how useful this is. Scanning one more page and one more book is a linear effort, but adding one more word to a dictionary is not. If I change my methods, does that make me more or less efficient? How can I know? -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se Project Runeberg - free Nordic literature - http://runeberg.org/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
