> Ok. In any case, there is no need to rebuild the dictionaries now. We can
> update to Morfologik 2.1.0 with the current ones. Only a minor change in the
> properties files is needed.
Yes, the format of automata did not change. The advantage of
recompiling/ converting your toolset to the new code
2016-03-08 18:02 GMT+01:00 Marcin Miłkowski :
> I think it's almost completely irrelevant. And for some languages, the
> differences are much bigger (e.g., for Polish), so fsa5 is definitely
> not the best format. So please go ahead with CFSA2.
>
Ok. In any case, there is no need to rebuild the d
W dniu 08.03.2016 o 17:43, Daniel Naber pisze:
> On 2016-03-08 00:11, Jaume Ortolà i Font wrote:
>
> Hi Jaume,
>
>> The Catalan dictionary is 1.1M with CFSA2 and 1.4M with FSA5. What
>> should we use? I don't know if the "the cost of traversing" the
>> dictionary is relevant.
>
> I'd suggest to use
On 2016-03-08 00:11, Jaume Ortolà i Font wrote:
Hi Jaume,
> The Catalan dictionary is 1.1M with CFSA2 and 1.4M with FSA5. What
> should we use? I don't know if the "the cost of traversing" the
> dictionary is relevant.
I'd suggest to use the smaller one. We won't need to re-build all the
dictio
Hi,
I have done the changes required in LT for updating to Morfologik 2.1.0.
You can see them in the branch "updatemorfologik" (a code clean-up is
pending).
Someone should test these changes before I push them.
The inputs for the dictionary builders are the same as before.
As for
