Shalu411
commented
9 years ago Namaste Yes, this is issue indeed. I get often confused with names on home page- esp. with Boetlingk's dictionaries. I do not know which one is which.. :) So uniformity and single standard matters within the site, at least. May be we should have a list of such issues in one place. They are not that difficult to address and solve. Lets have a google doc. and suggestions for uniformity.. and then the final list would go to the web site. Indeed, good data makes digital editions more helpful for users. "2014 digital edition- " Yes.. great suggestion. People will get an idea what that year is about. General notion wil take them to printed book data only. "Indian bookmakers --" Better make it an issue and raise with Indian publishers and not at this place, with this work. This is digital world. That's print world. This is cologne issues.. that is Indian book makers issue. No way related. Thankyou
gasyoun
drdhaval2785
https://github.com/sanskrit-lexicon/Cologne/issues/55 continued. When I click on "Bopp Glossarium Sanscritum" I get the popular name "Bopp Sanskrit Dictionary". It might be a good idea to have a popular name only above, but add bibliographical data below the "Downlods" link as well, please. And as now - there is no year of original data of publishing. "(2014 edition)" is a good way of telling how old is the digital file, but maybe make it "(2014 digital edition)"? There are so many reprints and Indian bookmakers rarely provide bibliography on the original book - we should not use the same practise. "MeulenBeld's Sanskrit Names of Plants" is even more puzzling. We see Gerrit Jan Meulenbeld (no B in the middle, it's not MacDonell) under the "The Mādhavanidāna" name. Yes, people looking for Indian plant names will say thanks, but not having it on the page at least somewhere is a bad idea. I would even add it to the Help or any other section, so it's easy to access. But people, who will want to quote that passage, will think bad about you, if we do not add that data.