Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
Delivery-date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 11:09:52 -0700
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 11:09:27 -0700
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
To: jbovlaste@lojban.org
Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: enforcing definitions ending in a .?
Message-ID: <20070923180927.GD2671@digitalkingdom.org>
Mail-Followup-To: jbovlaste@lojban.org
References: <46F63A20.9050603@perpetuum-immobile.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <46F63A20.9050603@perpetuum-immobile.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11)
Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org
Content-Length: 671
Lines: 19

On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 12:04:16PM +0200, Timo Paulssen wrote:
> i've noticed, that most definitions end in a ., so would it make
> sense to add a little warning if the definition does not end in a
> . or automatically add it (that would suck, though) for the sake
> of consistency?

That's trivial to do programmatically after the fact; that's the
sort of thing I'm not inclined to bother with until we're reviewing
the data to generate a printed dictionary with.

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"
Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/