From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Tue Apr 17 15:57:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 17 Apr 2001 22:57:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 69191 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2001 18:07:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 17 Apr 2001 18:07:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.169.75.101) by mta2 with SMTP; 17 Apr 2001 18:07:03 -0000 Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 14pZsQ-0004yo-00 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 11:06:58 -0700 Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 11:06:58 -0700 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Dictionary format Message-ID: <20010417110657.P31963@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com References: <01041501150602.16694@neofelis> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.17i In-Reply-To: <01041501150602.16694@neofelis>; from phma@oltronics.net on Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 12:40:06AM -0400 From: Robin Lee Powell On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 12:40:06AM -0400, Pierre Abbat wrote: > I'm thinking that, besides the dictionary format we currently have > (jukni:juk:spider:x1 is a spider of species x2:sometimes long list of comments > and cross-references), which is good for the Web, You're kidding, right? I think it sucks rocks. > especially with the cross-references rendered as hyperlinks, we should > have a more traditional dictionary format which would look something > like this: > > danlu [2 species; dal, da'u] animal > cakcinki [danlu] beetle > tirxe [danlu 3 stripes] tiger > o [a] if and only if, iff > a [between two sumti] or > thumbnail, n. (xan)tajycalku, (xan)tajyja'u; picture: cmaxra, cmabasti > > The stuff in the brackets immediately after the word is grammatical > information. For a brivla, it is the place structure (explicit or > cross-reference or both) and the rafsi, if any; for a cmavo it is the selma'o, > unless the cmavo is the type-word for that selma'o, in which case it is an > explanation of how it is used. The word "picture:" would be in italics. > > I think that this format, in book form, would be easy to digest for those used > to foreign-language dictionaries. What do you think? It's a little compact for my taste, but it'd certainly work. Where do the definitions themselves go, though? Here's what I use: danlu dal da'u animal x1 is an animal/creature of species x2; x1 is biologically animate (cf. banfi, cinki, cipni, finpe, jukni, respa, since, mabru, bakni) -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno je xlali -- RLP http://www.lojban.org/