Re: 'wiki' style (login enforced?) user/editor-guide

["wmaton" <wmaton@*********>]

De-lurking....

--- In edict-jmdict@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Breen" <jimbreen@...> wrote:
>
> Certainly an editorial guide is sorely needed. At present it's a bit
> like the British constitution; not written down anywhere, apart from
a bit
> here and a bit there as issues arise.

Still a convention is better than nothing.

> Yes, a wiki which covered EDICT/Jmdict/etc. editorial issues could
well be a
> good way to go. I have been intending for ages to write guidelines,
but other
> things keep getting in the way. There are probably a dozen people
who could
> write material for the guidelines, and if a Wiki is a way to get it
going, let's
> do it. Arakawa could be used as the site for it.
> 
> Anyone want to put up a system?

I think an editorial guide is a good idea, but instead of building up
a wiki, I'd like to see the original EDICT/KANJIDIC documentation used
as a foundation and expanded.  One major problem I have with a wiki is
that it can turn itself into a bit of a labyrinth if editorial control
isn't asserted - aside from other reasons why using it for the
dictionary data itself is not a good idea.  And if editorial control
is to be asserted, then the method of writing documentation becomes
secondary IMHO.

So first, let's see what we have with the present state of
documentation for those files, and extend those.  (I'd hate to see
parallel documentation spring up because it invites confusion in the
long run and even more things to maintain.)

wfms