I recently attended a conference with the topic of tools for
lexicography. I briefly demonstrated FLEx during one of the sessions.
Also present were representatives from other companies with dictionary
making tools. TshwaneLex was one, and KDictionaries another.
It is possible that these tools may be of use for some projects. I would
like to provide a sample LIFT file to both of these so that they can see
whether the output from FLEx can be imported into their systems. In
order to avoid having to do the work piecemeal, I would like to find an
example LIFT file that uses many of possible of the fields that are
included in FLEx.
Ideally this would be dictionary data which can be freely shared, as I
would like to show the results to those that are interested. The
Kdictionaries output is web based, in a similar way to the output from
Lexique Pro.
Please email me at david_...@sil.org if you have a dictionary project
which I could use in this way.
All the best,
David Baines.
On Nov 5, 2009, at 10:28 AM, David Baines wrote:
> It is possible that these tools may be of use for some projects. I
> would
> like to provide a sample LIFT file to both of these so that they
> can see
> whether the output from FLEx can be imported into their systems. In
> order to avoid having to do the work piecemeal, I would like to
> find an
> example LIFT file that uses many of possible of the fields that are
> included in FLEx.
A sample will be useful to them, but do be sure to point them to the
web page for LIFT:
http://code.google.com/p/lift-standard/
It notes that:
--
The LIFt standard is still evolving, as developers work with it. The
most recent version is always available in the repository, as an ODF-
format writeup and RelaxNG schema. The mailing list is fairly active.
--
Recently someone was wanting to import Tshwanelex data into FLEx. I
started working on that, but didn't get very far yet, so if someone
else wrote an XSL transform to convert from the XML that Tshwanelex
exports, into LIFT XML, that would be marvelous.
-Beth
Any idea what the correct (and safe) link is? Or is it only accessible
with username/ password?
Mike Maxwell
The correct link is:
I've updated the lift google code site also. Thanks for letting me know.
Regards,
Cambell
OK, it looks like the download is just an executable. Is there any
documentation somewhere, so I could find out what it does before
installing/ running it?
BTW, Cambell, you may recall that several years ago I wrote a Python
program to do something similar. Namely, you gave the program a regex
describing the desired hierarchy and order of fields in an entry, and it
would mark up your dictionary with the errors it detected. Where
possible, it would insert a missing field marker (filling it in with
"*add data*" or some such), or mark a field that needed to be moved; if
it found a malformed entry but couldn't figure out how to fix it, it
added a field marked "*error*". Repairs were to be done manually, but
since the problems were all tagged, you could use Toolbox's built-in
search to find all the problems. Normally a single pass with the
program, and you could fix the errors at your leisure; you could then
run the program again to ensure that you didn't introduce any new
errors. Don't know if this would be of any use, or if Solid supersedes
this.
--
Mike Maxwell
What good is a universe without somebody around to look at it?
--Robert Dicke, Princeton physicist
Mike Maxwell wrote:
> OK, it looks like the download is just an executable. Is there any
> documentation somewhere, so I could find out what it does before
> installing/ running it?
>
>
Yes, there's documentation on the Solid project site here:
http://projects.palaso.org/wiki/solid
There you will find a link to the manual as a pdf, and also a 'wink'
movie which shows a simple walk through.
> BTW, Cambell, you may recall that several years ago I wrote a Python
> program to do something similar. Namely, you gave the program a regex
> describing the desired hierarchy and order of fields in an entry, and it
> would mark up your dictionary with the errors it detected. Where
> possible, it would insert a missing field marker (filling it in with
> "*add data*" or some such), or mark a field that needed to be moved; if
> it found a malformed entry but couldn't figure out how to fix it, it
> added a field marked "*error*". Repairs were to be done manually, but
> since the problems were all tagged, you could use Toolbox's built-in
> search to find all the problems. Normally a single pass with the
> program, and you could fix the errors at your leisure; you could then
> run the program again to ensure that you didn't introduce any new
> errors. Don't know if this would be of any use, or if Solid supersedes
> this.
>
Yes, I remember. Solid doesn't do this function in the same way, but
it's role is to fill this space. i.e. Reporting and fixing SFM data
that is not in good shape.
Regards,
Cambell