Reacting toAndrew Dunbar.
A word may have several meanings in a language. Each meaning has its own
definition. Your "topo" would propably best translate to rodent which
includes both mice and rats. When there is no exact word or phrase for
mouse in Italian, it should not be only translated with the Italian
topo. I am sure a description in Italian for a mouse is possible.
At this moment in time we do not have a new quick system. What we are
discussing is the need for publishing our content in a re-usable
intermediary way like XML this should allow us to publish our current
content. How this XML will be used is what you talk about and you are
right it should be used with care. However, an en:wikionary English
word, its pronounciation, its translations its usage can all be validly
used in nl:wiktionary, the definition of the meanings the etymology need
translation. We can make an interwiki to en: and we can find these for
the time we have not done that yet.
It is not only {{lang}} but also {{-trans-}} ((-syn-}} {{-ant-}} etc.
that will get their local meaning in the local setup. This is not ideal.
These codes and their associated content should end up in a proper
database so that all of this can be done by the software.
Now when a good non en:wictionary editor starts with a word and comes up
with inaccuracies in the en:wiktionary, would you not like to know about
that? Would it not be valuable to you that you can benefit from the work ?
Articles on wiktionary in META can be found by their inclusion in the
category:wiktionary.
As to copying and pasting, this is the technique that is currently open
to us. We do not have something better. Because of copy and paste I was
able to add loads of translations to English, Japanese, Vietnamese words.
Opening up the wiktionary content will be hard. That is why I want us to
discuss it first before we commit to it. Once we decide that we need
this, the database will change, the way we enter content will change,
much content needs to be revisited. All this while the basic content
stays the same. We still want all the data that we have, but we will be
able to share it.
I have asked the wikimedia board to consider open content strategic;
this is one way of eventually getting developer attention.
There are open content English on-line dictionaries bigger than
wiktionary that use XML, would it not be great if we could cooperate ??
Use their researched content and them using our content ??
One aim for content could be to have a definition in wiktionary for all
Open Office words...
Thanks,
GerardM