Article View: net.internat
Article #144Re: Hyphenation (mainly interactive)
From: Chris Moss
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 1985 16:48
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 1985 16:48
8 lines
1149 bytes
1149 bytes
There's a fallacy in assuming the hyphenation dictionary is "the standard 100% accurate authority" of course. That is, no two hyphenation dictionaries I've seen agree with each other. Apart from traditional differences between British & American practices, editors fail to agree on how the agreed "rules" (many of which can conflict) apply. It seems an ideal area for work on automatic induction. Has anyone done anything that anyone knows about?
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<269@ivax.icdoc.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!seismo!mcvax!ukc!icdoc!cdsmReferences:
<501@harvard.ARPA> <471@harvard.ARPA>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 +MMDF+MULTI+2.11; site icdoc.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!seismo!mcvax!ukc!icdoc!cdsm From: cdsm@icdoc.UUCP (Chris Moss) Newsgroups: net.internat Subject: Re: Hyphenation (mainly interactive) Message-ID: <269@ivax.icdoc.UUCP> Date: Tue, 3-Dec-85 11:48:52 EST Article-I.D.: ivax.269 Posted: Tue Dec 3 11:48:52 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 6-Dec-85 07:55:45 EST References: <501@harvard.ARPA> <471@harvard.ARPA> Reply-To: cdsm@icdoc.UUCP (Chris Moss) Distribution: net Organization: Dept. of Computing, Imperial College, London, UK. Lines: 8 Xpath: icdoc ivax