James R. Johnson wrote:
If there were an Ultimate Wiktionary, I'd like to have ang available in Latin and Runic sets.
James
-----Original Message----- From: wiktionary-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wiktionary-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Jim Breen Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2005 10:12 PM To: The Wiktionary (http://www.wiktionary.org) mailing list Subject: Re: [Wiktionary-l] Ultimate Wiktionary and design decisions
[Gerard Meijssen ([Wiktionary-l] Ultimate Wiktionary and design decisions) writes:]
For the Ultimate Wiktionary I have documented some of the design criteria. It can be found here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Wiktionary_decisions_on_its_usage
The Data design can be found here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Wiktionary_data_design
I have added some comments to the Discussion pages of those two.
One crucial decision is that only correct spelling is allowed.
Fine, as long as you are going to cater for multiple correct spellings. If you don't it's going to be difficult for some languages, e.g., English, and impossible for others, e.g.. Japanese.
Many languages have different accepted spellings for the same word. Japanese with the three character sets. German with umlauts and ae, oe and ue or ss instead of ß. Esperanto accepts cx and ch for ^c. Dutch had at one time a preferred and a progressive spelling and English has some variants depending on the locality it is spoken. I'm sure it doesn't end there and it is something a multilingual dictionary has to cater for. Adding common misspellings shouldn't be all that hard. They simply need a possibility to be marked as such. The misspellings don't exactly have to be shown either (except maybe on demand), but when somebody uses them to search the database, the entries they point to should be found.
Just my 2 cents,
Polyglot