Talk:Wishlist: Difference between revisions

From EDRDG Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with 'Some wishes for JMDict/Edict : * Have a way to identify gairaigo. Lsource tag is great but most gairaigo are from english and they don't have a Lsource tag. ** maybe allow an em…')
 
No edit summary
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Some wishes for JMDict/Edict :
'''JLL :'''
 
* Have a way to identify gairaigo. Lsource tag is great but most gairaigo are from english and they don't have a Lsource tag.
* Have a way to identify gairaigo. Lsource tag is great but most gairaigo are from english and they don't have a Lsource tag.
** maybe allow an empty lsource for english gairaigo ?
** maybe allow an empty lsource for english gairaigo ?


* Have a tag for proper names
'''Jim Breen :'''
** could be a new PoS
I have resisted this as the vast majority are from English and it would add to the clutter. Major kokugojiten similarly only tag non-English gairaigo. What do others think?
 
* Add more fields
 
* Give its yomigana to each kanji of the Kanji part
** biggest problem being due to multiple Readings and/or Kanji parts
 
* Separate compound words and expressions into their component (with a link to its entry when possible)
** may be by extending the xref system
 
Some wishes for Kanjidic :


* Add a status to each reading : joyo reading (or split by grade), old/obsolete/obscure reading ...
'''JLL :'''
Two things :
1) kokugojiten do tag english gairaigo. The only difference is they don't (need to) specify the language source, as english is the default language.
It is the same difference than between :
* <lsource xml::lang="eng" />
And :
* <lsource />
I agree that the first form is not necessary, but the second one is.


* Separate the few gairaigo readings from on/kun-yomi
2) If I want to build a Japanese/French dictionary from JMDict, I won't take the english gloss and then I will also lose the etymology of the word (unless I add something like (from eng: xxxxx) in each non english gloss).
So maybe it is an advantage in a Japanese/English only dict, but not for a Multilingual one.
: In a way the first seems more logical. An empty lsource seems rather odd. It would really be shorthand for <lsource xml::lang="eng" />. I could live with either, as the EDICT/EDICT2 generator and dictionary client software that used JMdict could simply ignore it.[[User:JimBreen|JimBreen]] 05:30, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 05:30, 28 August 2010

JLL :

  • Have a way to identify gairaigo. Lsource tag is great but most gairaigo are from english and they don't have a Lsource tag.
    • maybe allow an empty lsource for english gairaigo ?

Jim Breen : I have resisted this as the vast majority are from English and it would add to the clutter. Major kokugojiten similarly only tag non-English gairaigo. What do others think?

JLL : Two things : 1) kokugojiten do tag english gairaigo. The only difference is they don't (need to) specify the language source, as english is the default language. It is the same difference than between :

  • <lsource xml::lang="eng" />

And :

  • <lsource />

I agree that the first form is not necessary, but the second one is.

2) If I want to build a Japanese/French dictionary from JMDict, I won't take the english gloss and then I will also lose the etymology of the word (unless I add something like (from eng: xxxxx) in each non english gloss). So maybe it is an advantage in a Japanese/English only dict, but not for a Multilingual one.

In a way the first seems more logical. An empty lsource seems rather odd. It would really be shorthand for <lsource xml::lang="eng" />. I could live with either, as the EDICT/EDICT2 generator and dictionary client software that used JMdict could simply ignore it.JimBreen 05:30, 28 August 2010 (UTC)