Re: Asha'ille dictionary online, searchable
From: | Arthaey Angosii <arthaey@...> |
Date: | Tuesday, November 23, 2004, 21:30 |
Emaelivpeith Pascal A. Kramm:
> The format used for browsing by letter or everything on one page is far too
> longwinded and unpractical. It would be much more usable if you would put
> everything in a table, like you can see on my Ichwara prana dictionary:
>
>
http://www.choton.org/ichwara/dict.html
My lexicon file has 649 entries, with the entire lexicon probably over
1000. I'm not a fan of giant tables (the "entire dictionary" link is
there at the suggestion of someone else, as I originally didn't think
I wanted one), but apparently others do like them. So I've redone the
all-on-one-page dictionary. The part of speech data was giving me
trouble, so I'll put that in later when I have time to figure out why
it's not showing up.
> Also, it would be nice to add the semantic functions of the words (noun,
> verb etc).
I do include this information on the page for each individual entry,
in parentheses after the Asha'ille word.
>As probably no one cares when certain words were added, that info
> is quite superfluent.
Then you are free to ignore that field. I like knowing how old a word
is relative to others, so I keep track of this data. It's been removed
from the all-in-one-page version, though.
> Besides this, I think that a search function is quite redundant, as
> practically every browser already has a search function that can be used. No
> need to re-invent the wheel.
So how do you do fuzzy searches with the browser's search function?
> >I'm developing on Linux and testing with Firefox v1.0PR.
>
> Why don't you use the final version of Firefox which is already avaiable
> since two weeks (Nov 9)?
Because it seg-faulted when I tried to install it with the installer,
and it wouldn't compile when I tried to do it myself. Others had
similar problems (as per some forum posts), so I figured I'd wait
awhile and try again later, in hopes the developers would fix the
problem, if it was on their side. Then I forgot about it and haven't
tried again.
--
AA
(watch the Reply-To!)