Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 10:51:12 -0600 (MDT)
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [lojban] Re: Fwd: Lojban dictionary in TEI
In-Reply-To: <a05010409b8f6db19b308@[210.49.154.210]>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.40.0205021018580.7970-100000@ucsub.colorado.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
From: Jay Kominek <jay.kominek@colorado.edu>
Content-Length: 1194
Lines: 32


On Thu, 2 May 2002, Nick Nicholas wrote:

> What I don't know is whether that might not overlap with what Jay had
> already gotten started with his own work on the dictionary. We'd
> obviously want the one to talk to the other. doi djez. pe'ipei

XML TEI would make a nice export target for whatever system I finally end
up producing.

However, XML is just a very structured flat file. You're limited in the
number of people who can work on it convinently.

As has been demonstrated, one person will not complete a dictionary in a
useful amount of time.

So, um, really, what I mean to say is that there isn't any overlap.
Single person efforts have a poor track record, but collaborative efforts
(Alice, the Wiki), produce nice results, quickly. Further, having a big
XML file solve any problems I've so far identified. (The main two being
that: 1) We need a quality typeset printed dictionary 2) We need a really
nice, canonical searchable online dictionary.)

This is not meant to in any way say that TEI isn't good stuff, I just
don't see how it solves any of our real problems.

- Jay Kominek <jay.kominek@colorado.edu>
  Plus =C3=A7a change, plus c'est la m=C3=AAme chose