Open rem0g opened 1 month ago
Yes, but the affiliation tags will have their own dictionary field. These will be read-only since they are added automatically based on the user that creates the gloss.
Anything specific for the Morphology? This was causing problems in the past when I was last working on it because it ends up being recursive.
Affiliation tags are available now in retrieval as an extended field. (Deployed)
For the morpohology, gloss ID or gloss name is sufficient and if it's a list that's fine.
For the morpohology, gloss ID or gloss name is sufficient and if it's a list that's fine.
There are three kinds of morphology, with examples shown below:
https://signbank.cls.ru.nl/dictionary/gloss/3910
https://signbank.cls.ru.nl/dictionary/gloss/3968/
https://signbank.cls.ru.nl/dictionary/gloss/726
I suggest this can be put in the package, retrieval. But not sure about the update. There are database constraints and relations between objects.
I can put all three in the package, retrieval. It's basically a one-liner for each since it's already implemented for CSV.
Is this syntax okay for package?
"Sequential Morphology": "FABRIEK-A + WEBCAM + AANHALINGSTEKENS"
A string of glosses, separated by +
.
(This syntax is used elsewhere in Signbank for display.)
Similarly:
"Simultaneous Morphology": "onder-boven:entrance under a roof"
"Simultane morfologie": "onder-boven:entrance under a roof"
"Sequentiële morfologie": "BOEK + SCHRIJVEN-B"
"Simultane morfologie": "wederkerige-relatie-A:elkaar"
"Blend-morfologie": "ZATERDAG:handshape, ZONDAG-A:handshape"
This is on signbank now.
Great thanks, will it work for glos update too?
Great thanks, will it work for glos update too?
Not now. I hesitate to implement an update for morphology. I will check if it's been implemented for CSV. It would be preferable if it's a separate API update url since it needs to do many more checks, since it's all relations.
The affiliations cannot be updated. Those are automated and tied to creation.
Ok, is it ok if i create an seperate issue and tag others so they can work on that too?
Ok, is it ok if i create an seperate issue and tag others so they can work on that too?
Yes, good idea. I found it in the CSV, so that helps.
Will you need other relations?
I've got it implemented now. I'm testing it on signbank-dev.
As it appears, I forgot how to update the fields. The syntax of the new value for morphology is not obvious. This will need to be written down somewhere.
Sequential morphology and Blend morphology both work now for updating.
The sequential needs to be separated by '+ '
(with spaces around)
The blend needs to be separated with commas ', '
(comma space) of GLOSS:role, where role is the same as in Gloss Edit.
(It's text, but remember this still needs to parse, so do not put comma's inside the role text)
@rem0g this is live on signbank-dev
For the syntax of the input, see #1252
This is live on signbank.
Can you please add those fields to json file:
Morphology Tags, we want to know if the gloss is made by UVA or RU.