Hi Gerard,
*Without explicit repetitions, how would you indicate if something is correct in a certain orthography ?
What I would like to have is something like this: Article: Oort {{-nds}} {{-noun-}} # Oort: description in LS of "a place" {{-nds-sass}} {{-nds-harte}} {{-nds-lindow-}} {{-nds-neuber}}
# Oort: description in LS of "a way" {{-nds-sass}}
where -nds-harte- has "Aart" instead of "Oort". And there needs to be some room to indicate that some orthoraphies have "Aart" for "Oort" in case of meaning 2.
I would not like to see main entries -nds-sass- etc, because they all translate to the same thing. It would not make sense to multiply the translation tables.
Besides: in a very high amount of cases these different versions are equal, and it does not make sense to multiply the content. We are writing a dictionary for Low Saxon and not one for Sass-Hamburg, Sass-Oostfreesland, Harte-Oostfreesland etc. And differences are only important where they exist and only in those cases need they be listed and in those cases they need comments as to why the differences exist.
If the UW cannot handle that, it would be nice to adapt it. I think that this is important. It is important to reuse data. If all data that someone has entered for -nds-sass- has to be reentered for -nds-harte- in those cases where both are equal (95% of the entries) then this is just an invitation for trouble, inconsistencies etc. Such redundancies of data must be caught by the design and not by the data.
Kind regards,
Heiko Evermann