There is a town in Texas called West, made infamous a few years ago by a
giant explosion. I don't think you can make assumptions about names of places.
Mark's suggestion to check for words ending in "s" will fail on many towns,
though apostrophe-s may be safe.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On September 1, 2018 5:49:30 AM Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode
<use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
I can see that the "problem", which my stack does not address, is with 2
or 3 part place names:
The Rochester/Chester problem is easily dealt with.
While it should be realtively easy to have a subroutine to deal with
words such as "West" (after all, there are no places just called "West"),
places like a town my parents once lived in called "Haselbury Plucknett"
would cause problems.
AND, places such as "Ruyton of the Eleven Towns"
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruyton-XI-Towns)
would really throw a spanner in the works.
Come to think of things . . .
Unless anyone's code can cope with "Ruyton of the Eleven Towns" it won't
stand up: we could even go further and call
this the "Ruyton of the Eleven Towns Test".
More muffled background noises.
Richmond.
On 1/9/2018 1:29 pm, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote:
On 2018-09-01 12:05, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode wrote:
Obviously, when considering names of places such as Colchester,
Rochester and Chester one has
to search for the longer names first and exclude them from later
searches.
The 'substring' problem (i.e. Chester being 'in' Rochester) isn't
relevant in the above algorithm because we are 'tokenising' input and
phrases - essentially changing the alphabet.
i.e. "Rochester Chester Colchester" is turned into ABC, and we match
A, B or C as atomic units.
I should perhaps point out that the 'processText' operation probably
needs to be a little better in practice - to at least include a 'stop'
token for punctuation. For example:
"The man walked starting from East Hartford, West Hartford could be
seen in the distance."
In the case where 'Hartford West' and 'Hartford' are the 'known' towns
(and not 'East Hartford') - the proposed tokenization would result in:
The,man,walked,starting,from,East,Hartford,West,Hartford,could,be,seen,in,the,distance
Which means you'd get "Hartford West" and "Hartford" - when you should
only get "Hartford" (assuming you care about the linguistic structure
of the text, at least).
Indeed, the above actually means in preprocessing the text, you can
actually vastly reduce the number of words to search - any sequences
of words which aren't in any pharse (or important punctuation) can be
replaced by "*" say. So the above would become:
*,East,Hartford,*,West,Hartford,*
The "*" tokens block matching multi-word phrases.
Warmest Regards,
Mark.
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
