If it is a question of dropping the "name" la-x-classic I have nothing
against; if it is a question of dropping a different hyphenation scheme
from modern and medieval Latin, I don't agree at all.
Besides the fact that it took me a whole month work to examine all
possible prefixes and declination/conjugation endings in order to assure
proper etymological hyphenation for classic Latin, the two schemes are
so different that it is impossible to merge them in just one pattern file.
May be "lac_LA" would match the general scheme in a better way?
All the best
Claudio
On 10/03/2016 14:54, Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 09:28:08AM +0100, Luis Bernardo wrote:
Thank you for bringing this up to our attention. I agree it doesn't make
much sense our current conversion. I will work on a different solution,
which I will confirm with you before I commit.
For what it's worth, I recommend dropping la-x-classic entirely, and
for mul-ethi, you could either use mul_Ethi if that's allowed in your
tagging scheme, or produce several identical files for the different
languages using the Ethiopic script; mostly Ge'ez [gez], Amharic [am],
Tigrinya [ti] and Tigre [tig] (but the patterns might not be that well
suited to Amharic according to discussions we've had).
Best,
Arthur
