4 ms·
> into YAML Please reconsider this technical choice. YAML is a not only quite hard to edit manually, it's also difficult to transform automatically. I'm workin
by tasogare 6y ago
> into YAML
Please reconsider this technical choice. YAML is a not only quite hard to edit manually, it's also difficult to transform automatically. I'm working in the dictionary space and the field is mostly using XML. While there is no standardized set of tags (I know of a PhD working on it), this is the format people are confortable with in the field, and is very easy to transform into any other formats including YAML.
Moreover I agree that the source material is clear enough, and most of it is English, making OCR an obvious go-to in this situation.
- thomasfromcdnjs 6y agoI completely agree. I gave it a decent amount of thought and pulled the trigger, and went with YAML. Not because I think YAML is the ideal end target for the datasets. Likely it would be best represented in a database with a custom CMS and outputted in a more robust format such as XML. Though considering that the current archives for the indigenous languages are primitive in their documentation, I think YAML will get the project started. It is just ever so slightly easier to get contributors started. As the project matures (and before it gets to complex), I will convert all the YAML datasets to something more appropriate and build the tooling to handle it in tandem. Again, you are correct, and I will add my reasoning to the current documentation.