automatic dictionary generation / glossary

[solpahi]

The introduction chapter says this:

This list of words should be generated automatically from the contents of the main lesson texts.

The format I would use for the dictionary is <word> <_natlang English_> \<Lessons in which it appears> E.g. chuq, to eat (something); 2, 3, 9, 24

(The lesson numbers could be links.)

[uakci]

I'm led to believe that a generated list would hinder your productivity.

If you compile the vocabulary by hand, you'll remember which words are in it better, and you'll be less likely to introduce new words by mistake.

Although if you want the feature anyway, sure, why not. But one anticipatory question: where would the definitions be drawn from?

[uakci]

@solpahi ping

[solpahi]

I missed your response.

I'm led to believe that a generated list would hinder your productivity.

If you compile the vocabulary by hand, you'll remember which words are in it better, and you'll be less likely to introduce new words by mistake.

I don't understand. I'm keeping track of the introduced vocab elsewhere anyway, but the generated list could serve the same purpose. I don't follow your logic, but don't worry, the list would not hinder my productivity.

But the main purpose of the list is for the reader (especially in a print version) to be able to see which words are in the course, and where to find them. Creating and especially maintaining this list by hand would be insanity.

Although if you want the feature anyway, sure, why not.

It's 100% necessary for me.

But one anticipatory question: where would the definitions be drawn from?

They would be drawn from our dictionary.json, to which we would add a natlangy definition field, such that chuq ->to eat (something)`. If you could add the field, I and other volunteers could fill in the definitions. We'd eventually want that kind of thing anyway.

[uakci]

I missed your response.

That's no problem.

It's 100% necessary for me.

Okay then. (My logic is slightly flawed.)

They would be drawn from our dictionary.json, to which we would add a natlangy definition field, such that chuq -> to eat (something)`. If you could add the field, I and other volunteers could fill in the definitions. We'd eventually want that kind of thing anyway.

Add the issue to the tracker over at toaq/dictionary and I'll work on it (and, also, some other things I forgot to do). And I'll try to code the vocabulary generator soon too.

[solpahi]

Add the issue to the tracker over at toaq/dictionary and I'll work on it

Done.