Lars Aronsson wrote:
Sabine Cretella wrote:
Well Lars, we are not so far away from making a
different point
in that. It is one of the usages we have in mind with Ultimate
Wiktionary. Since there we will have words in all languages and
have these words in a relational database it is easy to "extract
an actual spellchecker" every now and then.
I keep hearing these promises, but "seeing is believing"! Have
you started actual work on UW yet, or are you sitting idle while
waiting for Wikidata to be released? Will there be an English
free dictionary that can compete in size and quality with Aspell's
current dictionary by the end of 2005? Or by the end of 2006?
Hoi,
Actual work on UW itself is underway. Here you can find the data desisgn
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Wiktionary_data_design This
design is very much open for comments and I am happy to say that many
comments that were given have led to changes. I name but a few changes
that came about this way; Can sign languages be included - now they can,
Can attestations be included - now they can.
As Ultimate Wiktionary is dependent on Wikidata, there is little option
for us but to wait untill it is ready. It is really important that
Wikidata is done well because it will not serve only Ultimate Wiktionary
but also Ultimate Wiktionary.
When both Aspell and Ultimate Wiktionary are considered Free, it should
be possible for us to work together. Once we find this cooperation
possible, we could host the data currently included in Aspell in UW. In
return we would provide a publicly accessible website where it is easy
to add new words thay will end up in Aspell. Even when we do not
cooperate, there will be languages that currently do not have a
spellchecker. These spellcheckers I am particularly exited about because
this is where we will be able to add value.
Without a massive infusion of data, it will be hard to predict when we
have as many words as Aspell does for languages where Aspell has a
dictionary.
Then again, if we create a wordcount on the Wikipedia content, run it
against a spellchecker, the resulting list should be spelled correctly
and could be included in UW. Particularly for our biggest wikipedias and
the amount of topics covered, it should be a list that might be close to
the size of what Aspell has. We will also have a long list of words
missing in Aspell. We will however not get a spellchecker for British or
American in this way.
Thanks,
GerardM.
Thanks,
GerardM