jmdict
1959730
Active
(id:
2172809)
<entry id="2172809" stat="A" corpus="jmdict" type="jmdict">
<ent_corp type="jmdict">jmdict</ent_corp>
<ent_seq>1959730</ent_seq>
<k_ele>
<keb>ウイルス病</keb>
</k_ele>
<k_ele>
<keb>バイラス病</keb>
</k_ele>
<r_ele>
<reb>ウイルスびょう</reb>
<re_restr>ウイルス病</re_restr>
</r_ele>
<r_ele>
<reb>バイラスびょう</reb>
<re_restr>バイラス病</re_restr>
</r_ele>
<sense>
<pos>&n;</pos>
<field>&med;</field>
<gloss>virus disease</gloss>
<gloss>viral disease</gloss>
</sense>
<info>
<audit time="2012-08-03 07:19:33" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Marcus</upd_name>
<upd_refs>daijs</upd_refs>
<upd_diff>@@ -7,0 +7,3 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>バイラス病</keb>
+</k_ele>
@@ -9,0 +12,5 @@
+<re_restr>ウイルス病</re_restr>
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>バイラスびょう</reb>
+<re_restr>バイラス病</re_restr></upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2012-08-03 23:29:17" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>This is one of those uncomfortable cases where the kanji/reading splits into two orthogonal sets. It sort-of makes sense to have them in the one entry, but it ends up being messy. Still probably better than having two entries with xrefs.</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2012-08-04 04:22:27" stat="A">
<upd_uid>rene</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Rene Malenfant</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
</audit>
<audit time="2022-01-09 02:36:03" stat="A">
<upd_uid>Marcus</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Marcus Richert</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_diff>@@ -19,0 +20 @@
+<field>&med;</field></upd_diff>
</audit>
</info>
</entry>