Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On 01/01/11 10:26, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
The advantage we have of using dicollect is that sophie part of that
community already lee. We would have the backing of the lead dev as well as
their entire team of devs to help work with us in implementing dicollect.

Please understand that I wasn't suggesting you dump dicollect (and
Sophie) in favour of wiktionary. But rather that you collaborate with
both in an effort to:

1) Pool your collective resources, in particular wiktionary and
dicollects collective submission 'crowds'.

2) Provide a more robust and feature rich dictionary resource.

Allow me to illustrate. LibreOffice, dicollect and wiktionary could
collaborate to achieve the following:

1) Define a HTML standard which would allow the scraping of wiktionary
articles for spellings, alternatives and localised spellings,
definitions, etymological information, synonyms and antonyms.

2) Use the above HTML standard to allow efficient conversion (through
scraping) of wiktionary articles to hunspell formatted dictionaries and

3) Merge or cross-reference the wiktionary and dicollect submission
processes. Such that either

        i) The two project merge and subsequently use the same submission
processes, or

        ii) A submission to dicollect results in automatic scraping of the
relevant wiktionary article, and if none exists automatically generates
a stub (pending moderation). Whilst A submission to wiktionary (pending
moderation?) automatically triggers a submission to dicollect.

4) Develop efficient in-application submission mechanisms for both
dicollect (simple) and wiktionary (rich) from within LibreOffice
applications. The later could be incorporated within a separate
dictionary application as outlined below.

5) Develop an interface to access wiktionary's rich pool of dictionary
information, perhaps a separate LibreOffice dictionary/thesaurus
application. Such an application could reside on the cloud and simply
use custom CSS to meld wiktionary articles into the application chrome.

Of point *3*, I favour *ii* as the wikimedia interface of wiktionary may
intimidate the casual user seeking only to submit a spelling or
alternative spelling.

I realise of course that such a collaboration, being between three
organisations, would be far from easy. But it does seem that wiktionary
and dicollect, at least, share a common enough goal that it would be
advantageous to try. Especially given that wiktionary already has a
substantial multi-lingual user-base (in particular English) where as
dicollect appears to be limited to French alone (or am I incorrect in
that assumption).

Kind Regards,

Lee Hyde.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel"

        -- Dr. Samuel Johnson (April 7th, 1775)

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.