Merging adj lexical entries #284
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Unfortunately I am going to have to reject this PR as it reformats the source code in a way that would make it hard to track changes. See Contribution Guidelines: "Avoid the use of automatic tools or formatters to keep commits small and trackable." |
|
Ha!
Will be available in the fork!!!
Le jeu. 13 févr. 2020 à 12:26, John McCrae <notifications@github.com> a
écrit :
… Unfortunately I am going to have to reject this PR as it reformats the
source code in a way that would make it hard to track changes.
See Contribution Guidelines
<https://github.com/globalwordnet/english-wordnet/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md>:
"Avoid the use of automatic tools or formatters to keep commits small and
trackable."
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#284?email_source=notifications&email_token=AEARNLD46DHHH7ZKVDMVMOTRCUU5XA5CNFSM4KULKQH2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOELUM6SI#issuecomment-585682761>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEARNLBXPZHKQY5ETXZZVYLRCUU5XANCNFSM4KULKQHQ>
.
|
|
Hi, so I reformatted this PR to the format. You can see the diff here The diff uncovered a small bug with the lemmas for 'tete-a-tete', 'cock-a-hoop', 'two-a-penny' A new PR for this is at #287 |
|
-AFAIK there is no pretty-printing policy, or is there ? The data looks like the output of xmllint but it's not, at least with default settings. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Following issues #180 and #283
The adjective lexical entries have been merged and named without adjective position (ewn-aware-p--a + ewn-aware-a -> ewn-aware-a). They group the senses originally split among (otherwise similar) multiple lexentries.
The naming follows the format specification. see format
Sense ids are not affected and preserve adj position information (ewn-aware-p--a-00191603-01 ewn-aware-a-01984219-02). The order in which they appear is preserved under the new grouping.
The schema is unchanged (adj position appears only within the sense id) and has not been exported to an attribute or element. How about provisionally using 'note' or 'dc:type' which are legit ?
Source code
https://github.com/1313ou/ewn-transformation3/blob/master/merge-lexentries3.xsl
This requires a XSLT3.0 transformer and Saxon is used.
Sorry I don't know what pretty-print formatter you use so I left it the way Saxon outputs it.