AT> I surely agree if it makes sense. >> goldendict can use dict-wn package, but dict-wn look worse than >> wordnet-goldendict, because this script was specially written to get >> the nicest form.
AT> Ahh, OK. Perhaps it might make sense to verify how wordnet-goldendict AT> might look in text interface. It might make sense to give a nicely AT> formatted UI preference and live with the not so beautiful but prefectly AT> readable console output. unfortunately console dict doesn't work with this format of dictionary, do You know another console tool? >> dict-wn CAN be used, but wordnet-goldendict has more nice form. >> Compare screenshots in attache: >> >> ss-dict-wn.png and ss-wordnet-goldendict.png >> >> the first is oriented to use in terminal, the second is oriented to >> use in GUI. AT> The screenshots are enlighting, thanks. How does a dict terminal would AT> look like with wordnet-goldendict? I don't know. I didn't manage to try console utilitie, because i haven't found such util which can understabd dsl format. :( AT> I'm actually a bit concerned about #549768 which might result in some AT> more complete rebuilds. BTW, on which architecture did you builded the AT> package. Did you aboserved any problem. No, I've built and rebuilt package a few times, without any problems. AT> According to the timing. I will have only 128kBit upload which AT> frequently breaks upload of larger packages like WordNet. So I AT> can not upload your patch before Monday. Please ping me if you AT> did not heard anything from me until Wednesday next week. Oh, Don't be hurry. It is enough for me to have knowledge that You agreed my patch :)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
