Re: [edict-jmdict] Deleted entries markers absent from JMdict files

[Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@*********>]

Hello Jim,

> Hmm. The intention is that they stay the same, but the nature of the
> entry might change. For example an entry in the form XXに might get edited
> to be just XX. Is that a different entry? Some would say so.

It would be a problem if entries numbers were reassigned, but AFAIK
this is not the case. As far as I have seen, entries ID keep the same
semantics, which is a safe to me.

> > 2) I also use the comment field to know which entries had been deleted
> > from JMdict and update the user table to point to the merged entry
> > whenever applicable (the other option is to delete missing entries, as
> > keeping a non-existing entry ID into the table would result in a
> > crash).
>
> You need to work around that. Deletions are happening all the time for
> various reasons.

Yes. In that case I have no choice but remote the entry from the user
data. Rough, but that's the only way since there is no tracking of
deleting entries.

So in short, I hope some merging information will appear again in
JMdict in the future. If it does not, well, I can survive the current
way, but I expect to get a mail from an angry user once in a while...
;)

Alex.