> Wikidata's Lexeme project is progressing slowly, but its direction is right.
> It will finally build a technical platform that is actually good for a
> dictionary.
A wiki article is a very similar type to dictionary presentation of lexemes.
The best dictionaries also cover morphemes, e.g., "gra
Le 02/03/2018 à 00:46, Jean-Philippe Béland a écrit :
I think this is à propos in this discussion about how authoritative can be
the Wiktionary... here a scientific article starts by using a definition
from the Wiktionary:
http://theconversation.com/de-facebook-au-developpement-des-plantes-quand-
I think this is à propos in this discussion about how authoritative can be
the Wiktionary... here a scientific article starts by using a definition
from the Wiktionary:
http://theconversation.com/de-facebook-au-developpement-des-plantes-quand-les-reseaux-sen-melent-90891
JP
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 a
2018-02-28 23:09 GMT+02:00 James Salsman :
>
> > building an authoritative dictionary is considerably
> > harder than building a (de facto) authoritative encyclopedia.
>
> What reason is there to think that? My any measure of editor hours, or
> the amount of money it would take to replicate the eff
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 1:09 PM James Salsman wrote:
> > We are not *teaching* encyclopedia articles.
>
> What is the difference between delivering the text of an encyclopedia
> article and teaching it?
Depending on one's understanding of "teaching", and its expected outcomes,
the difference ca
> building an authoritative dictionary is considerably
> harder than building a (de facto) authoritative encyclopedia.
What reason is there to think that? My any measure of editor hours, or
the amount of money it would take to replicate the effort, or the
maintenance load going forward, I'm sure t
