On 2014-10-14 08:56, Jaume Ortolà i Font wrote:
> Wikicheck is not working now for articles with titles that include
> some diacritic. See, for example, [1]. It used to work well.
Should be fixed now. I have no idea why this stopped working...
Regards
Daniel
-
2014-10-14 8:49 GMT+02:00 R.J. Baars :
> I could list hem, but I don't want to yet. I first want to resolve the
> license.
>
> Just data It is a lot more work to collect data like this, than it is
> to make a little program. I don't see the difference. It is the effort and
> ingenuity that co
After conferring a bit more with Daniel, I decided to make my company to
publish the top 30% of the frequency lists free and open using CC-BY.
This should be enough for LT.
If you want to add frequencies to the morfologik speller, the frequency
list for your language could be in the complete set o
Hi,
I did some internal cleanup to the poxm.xml files so that they contain
less duplication. It shouldn't make a difference for anyone, but if you
have problems building LT with Maven, let me know.
Regards
Daniel
--
On 2014-10-11 12:00, Daniel Naber wrote:
> to provide LT as a 100% pure Java software, I'd like to switch from
> Hunspell (native code) to Morfologik (Java-based). For that, I think
> the
> following languages are easy to switch:
>
> Asturian
I've switched over Asturian now, would be nice
On 2014-10-14 08:56, Jaume Ortolà i Font wrote:
> Wikicheck is not working now for articles with titles that include
> some diacritic. See, for example, [1]. It used to work well.
I know... I don't know how to solve this, everything works fine locally
and I also don't see what has changed. It se
On 14 October 2014 08:35, Daniel Naber
wrote:
> On 2014-10-13 23:09, Juan Martorell wrote:
>
> > java.io.IOException: Cannot load or parse input stream of
> > '/org/languagetool/rules/es/grammar.xml'
>
> You have local changes in your grammar.xml, don't you? This exception
> indicates the 'name'
On 2014-10-14 08:49, R.J. Baars wrote:
> I even would rather exclude commercial use without written consent of
> the
> owner (me). In fact, I would object to any use except for open and free
> purposes.
>
> Is there a license that fits that?
Creative Commons has a "non-commercial" option, but t
