Correction submissions not changed

[funderburkjim]

nakSatramAlAy, L=56210. This correct. It is a denominative verb from the noun nakSatramAlA

pAJcAlaputra , L=65487. L=65487 is hw pAJcAlya, could not find pAJcAlaputra

Under hoDa, •gan2a => gan2a . The • is markup Thomas added to indicate the next word is grammatical term (I think). Most commonly appears in digitization before genders (like •f.) . make_xml.py converts •f. in digitization to

<gram n="f">f.</gram>

But, •gan2a occurs 600+ times, and doesn't end in a period. So, I modified make_xml.py to include it in xml as

<gram n="gan2a">gan2a</gram>

The display disp.php uses the sqlite version of pw.xml. Currently, this turns the 'gram' element into css class 'gram', and the main.css currently specifies the 'gram' class to be font-weight:bold; the result is that in the display, 'f.' and 'gan2a' are turned bold (and, also, gan2a becomes gaṇa.)

gavinI to change to gavIni. Not changed. But maybe it should be changed sometime if all the corrections of vol. 7 are integrated into the digitization; we do not have digitizations of the volume 7 corrections I noticed MW has both forms, but the 'gavinI' form in MW has same meaning (herd of cows) as in PW; possibly MW copied an error from PW. Note: in our scans, gavinI shows on p. 338. Also, notice that 'gavInI' appears (with PW comment) in Schmidt - confirming Thomas' assertion of the relation between Schmidt and PW.

tindukI => tinduki Similar comment to gavinI. Also analogous comments re MW/Schmidt hold.

rathaspaSTa => rasaspaSTa . Similar comments. But, Schmidt has rathaspaSTa instead of rasaspaSTa. MW has only rathaspaSTa

To summarize the last three: You are suggesting corrections based on the Addendum material of PW. In my opinion, the integration of the Addenda, when it is done, should be done systematically at one time and should include knowledge of Schmidt. It should not be done 'ad hoc' in the same way that typographical errors are corrected. There are design issues involved in doing this so that the result is not a mess. In such a merger, probably both gavinI and gavInI would be headwords, and some additional meta-data is required so that the relation between the digital edition and the printed edition can be maintained. Do you wish to undertake the task of this integration of the Addenda?

Something like the combined PW-Schmidt display (http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/PWScan/disp2/index.php) has some use, and perhaps could be made with the current versions of the two dictionaries.

[gasyoun]

Every time I ask I'm afraid you'll answer. Because when you answer a new page can be added to the missing manual. Let me quote: "possibly MW copied an error from PW." please read the paper "Zgusta - Copying in Lexicography - Mondier-Williams 1988" http://yadi.sk/d/h8ALxcCb8sY9w "integration of the Addenda, when it is done, should be done systematically at one time and should include knowledge of Schmidt" -at one time sounds great. Can we have two times - headwords one time, else - another time, after Kaliyuga? "Do you wish to undertake the task of this integration of the Addenda?" - in the headword part. Otherwise 100 pages in PWK will kill me before I reach 32. Based on your PWK scan I prepared files like "pw7_OCR.pdf", around 200 Mb (three times bigger, than before), with a German OCR layer. I could give them, if you think it's a good idea to upload to the server. So I looked in the document for the text "so zu lesen st.", but as there are many rude mistakes in the OCR, I need to have shorter text, so I search for "zu lesen", otherwise I'll miss several cases. I'm halfway done. I don't want to improve my local files only. This time I want headwords right on your server as well. To have all Addenda at once sounds great, but hardly possible alone. Split? "Something like the combined PW-Schmidt display" would need an update, right?

[funderburkjim]

Conjecture: All 'so zu lesen st.' examples appear in Schmidt. (However, this conjecture is based on a very small sample.)

[funderburkjim]

I mentioned this to Peter, and he corrected a misconception that I had.

My question to Peter:

For Instance, "atidIpti, so zu lesen st. ayidIpti" appears in the Addenda for vol. 7, which I 
think means that in the   headword entry for atidIpti (which does exist in PW), 
the headword is misspelled and the correct spelling is ayidIpti.  
(Am I interpreting this properly?)

Peter's reply:

The reverse.  atidIpti is correct and is already there in Böhtlingk cum Schmidt, added by the latter 
apparently; it must have been mispelled in some text, not necessarily in the dictionary.  
It is not found in Böhtlingk and Roth nor in MW.

So, the 'so zu lesen st.' entries in the addenda are, as I understand it now, NOT providing a correction to the spelling of the headwords in the body of PW.

[gasyoun]

I can only add that Additions to SCH have been implemented as well (= additions to additions).