SignPuddle database design options
Stephen E Slevinski Jr
slevin at SIGNPUDDLE.NET
Wed Jul 3 13:29:16 UTC 2013
On 7/3/13 7:16 AM, Charles Butler wrote:
> If it acts like a noun, signs like a noun, it's a noun.
Hi Charles, I agree. Nouns, verbs, ... for Parts of Speech.
> The term "classifier" is a term I don't see listed yet.
I was wondering about that.
* Should classifier be added to the list?
* Is a classifier only part of a sign?
* Can classifier fall under another part of speech, such as noun or pronoun?
On 7/2/13 9:41 AM, Adam Frost wrote:
> I think that would be a very good idea for all of the categories to be
> able to select a subcategory to say specifically what type of verb,
> noun, etc.
I'm torn by simplicity & usability versus flexible & exact.
I'm leaning towards a static list of 9 parts of speech. I imagine a use
case of searching for a verb with a specific handshape. Additionally, a
custom tree to define parts of speech for each sign language would be a
> It is might be good to have test and/or student for SignPuddle because it is so open and free. I also think it might be good to have an "edited" labeling so that people can know which ones have been established as the proper or "correct" spellings that has been accepted.
Good point. Maybe have the lexicon usage as:
archaic : sign that is no longer fashionable, but is dated.
formal : sign whose use is typically restricted to polite, ceremonious,
colloquial : sign whose use is typically restricted to casual,
student: sign entered by student
Then add a quality marker such as:
On 7/3/13 3:02 AM, maria galea wrote:
> Steve, why don't you send the original email to the sign linguist
> email list for consultation
Hi Maria, interesting idea. I will write to the sign linguist today.
> Adam Schembri had taken the German Puddle Dictionary as an example and
> noticed that there are more than one entries for a lexeme - and in
> this aspect i think he was right.
He is most certainly right. I am tempted to implement part of the
Lexical Markup Framework, but it is just wishful thinking on my part.
Many of these issues can be addressed when we start the Wiktionary projects.
On 7/2/13 8:01 AM, Jonathan Duncan wrote:
> Will you be creating one database for all the puddles? Or one per puddle?
> Also when you finish this discussion, I would like to look over your
> proposed database schema, so I can give my 2 cents worth, if you are
> open to that.
Hi Jonathan, I will create one database for all the puddles. The
database is part of the SignWriting Icon Server. You can see the
current design that supports the v1 API on GitHub. I will let you know
when I update the design following this discussion.
The other topic I didn't address was regional / dialects. It would
probably be a good idea. Each sign language could have its own list of
language divisions. It would be useful for searching.
Thanks for all the feedback and ideas.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Sw-l