-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Glottocode errors in a few lexicore datasets #35
Comments
Suggested corrections for incorrect glottocodes. See lexibank/lexibank-analysed#35
Note: I am only making changes to the languages files, in order to do this quickly on the web interface. If PRs are accepted, the cldf datasets need to be regenerated by someone who has the whole cldfbench environment ready :) |
Thanks @XachaB -- I've handled dunnaslian, zgraggenmadang, servamalagasy. |
Thanks. All datasets need of course to be re-released later. |
Thanks, @XachaB, for pointing this out. I'm checking all of the cases listed here and preparing a PR for the new release. |
I already addressed these wrong Glottocodes and am preparing a PR with the fixes. The only one pending is the Glottocode for Proto-Central-Sogeram (which needs another fix because it's downloading the language metadata from a url in the I'll reference this issue once the PR is open and close it once the PR is merged. |
Awesome, thanks for taking care of this @MuffinLinwist. Double-checked the repos again and everything looks good! |
Hi,
I spotted a few glottocodes which seem unknown of glottolog, listed below. I am making a single issue here, rather than 8 issues each on a single dataset bug tracker.
When it was clear which was the correct glottocode (exact same variety name, similar glottocode which makes it look like a type), I provide the correct code too:
sidwellbahnarickass1248Kassengzgraggenmadangsali1249saki1249maia-sakizgraggenmadangpara1207para1307parawenI'll make a few PRs when I did find a correction.
Shouldn't cldfbench have checked this automatically and flagged the codes as incorrect ? If not, that would probably be a useful check to add.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: