I've adjusted the plan quite a bit - it now gives more time to transfer
rules and checks for a few other problems that I thought might come up. How
does it look?
Weeks 1-5, .dix files:
Week 1: Redundant Entry Finder
Week 2: Testing Full Entries in Lemmas where Part of the Lemma is Specified
by the Pardef; Testing Misspelled Tags and Pardefs
Week 3: Testing Incompatible Tags; Testing Tag Missing on One Side of
Translation Equivalents (in bilingual dictionaries)
Week 4: Testing Missing Gender on Gendered Languages (in bilingual
dictionaries)
Week 5: Bundling features together in one program; re-organizing code, and
writing documentation, to make sure that everything is as neat and
maintainable as possible. Combining tests from previous weeks into a single
testing program so that all features can be tested at once when the code is
modified in the future.
Weeks 6-12, transfer rules:
Week 6: Checking inappropriate uses of <equal>, <begins-with>,
<ends-with>, and <let> in transfer rules (equating a tag with a non-empty
string literal, etc.)
Week 7: Checking for cases where the user asks for nonexistent tags with
lit-tag v="some_tag" (always an error) or for a string literal with lit
v="some_string" that is identical to a tag (suspicious and very likely an
error).
Week 8: Checking for undefined tags after attr-item in attribute
definitions, probably due to spelling errors. Checking for calls to
anything other than a defined attribute, lem, lemh, lemq, whole, or tags
after part= in a clip.
Week 9: Checking for patterns that refer to non-existent categories,
probably due to spelling errors. Checking for misspelled variables.
Week 10: Checking for an untagged chunk (ex., in the rule "HACE NUM NOM" in
apertium-en-es.en-es.t1x, forgetting to give the resulting chunk the tag
"adverb," which seems like a conceivable mistake to me). Checking for
incorrect number of arguments in calls to macro.
Week 11: Checking for missing <test> after <when> and for non-boolean
arguments to <test>, <and>, <not>, and <or> (unless the compiler already
checks for that sort of thing?). Testing missing lemma queue after lemma
head.
Week 12: Bundling all features together into one program (note that this
program would need to take a suitable dictionary file, in addition to a
transfer rules file, as input to determine the set of valid tags).
Re-organizing code, and writing documentation, to make sure that everything
is as neat and maintainable as possible. Combining tests from previous
weeks into a single testing program so that all features can be tested at
once when the code is modified in the future.
-Aaron
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Francis Tyers <[email protected]> wrote:
> El dv 23 de 03 de 2012 a les 10:27 +0100, en/na Jacob Nordfalk va
> escriure:
> >
> >
> > 2012/3/23 Francis Tyers <[email protected]>
> > El dj 22 de 03 de 2012 a les 20:33 -0400, en/na Aaron Rubin va
> > escriure:
> > > Thanks for the suggestions, everyone! This is my tentative
> > schedule,
> > > as of now:
> > >
> > > Weeks 1-7, .dix files:
> > > Week 1: Redundant Entry Finder
> > > Week 2: Testing Full Entries in Lemmas where Part of the
> > Lemma is
> > > Specified by the Pardef
> > > Week 3: Testing Misspelled Tags and Pardefs
> > > Week 4: Testing Incompatible Tags
> > > Week 5: Testing Tag Missing on One Side of Translation
> > Equivalents
> > > Week 6: Testing Missing Gender on Gendered Languages
> > > Week 7: Bundling all of these features together in one
> > program;
> > > testing.
> > > Weeks 8-10, Transfer rules:
> > > Week 8: Checking inappropriate uses of <equal>,
> > <begins-with>,
> > > <ends-with>, and <let> in transfer rules. Perhaps contains
> > substring
> > > (<cmp substr>) and <in> as well? I'm having a bit of trouble
> > figuring
> > > out where and why those two are used.. if someone could
> > point me to a
> > > tutorial page with an illustrative example, I'd appreciate
> > it. The
> > > same for <begins-with> and <ends-with>, for that matter.
> > > Week 9: Checking for cases where the user asks for
> > nonexistent tags.
> > > Week 10: Checking for incorrect number of arguments in calls
> > to macro
> > > (Weeks 9 and 10 will probably take less than a week, but
> > Week 8's task
> > > might be intricate enough to compensate)
> > > Week 11-12: Bundling all features together into one program.
> > Possibly
> > > combining with .dix files checker, with a feature to check
> > which type
> > > of file is being input. Writing and running tests (adding
> > deliberate
> > > errors to sample .dix and transfer rules files to see
> > whether the
> > > program catches them). Writing documentation to ensure that
> > code is
> > > maintainable.
> >
> >
> > It seems that the plan is time skewed in favour of .dix files
> > (imho the
> > easier task). If anything I would say that 7 weeks on transfer
> > and 2
> > weeks on dictionaries seems more sensible.
> >
> > I think that it might be a good idea to go through the
> > language pair
> > HOWTO, and see what kind of errors/pitfalls you come across
> > that aren't
> > handled by the validation programs.
> >
> >
> > I'd also suggest that you set time aside to get into the problem
> > domain if you haven't already done so:
> >
> >
> > 1) work a little on a pair
> > 2) interview/observe someone who has just started working on a pair
> >
> >
> > Writing a system which is supposed to help others, especially
> > beginners, will be better written by someone who has experienced the
> > obstacles themselves.
>
> Excellent advice!
>
> Fran
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF email is sponsosred by:
Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
_______________________________________________
Apertium-stuff mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
