Dear Hiro, I¹d be happy to do that and to run with what we¹ve agreed this morning, or something even better if we can think of it. Regards, Chris. == Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon On 22/06/2015 10:17, "HiroHOTTA" <hotta@jprs.co.jp> wrote:
As the documents have been already distributed to all CJK GP members and IP members, I don't like to send another version which may result in confusion.
So, could Edmon (or Chris) propose the change of the wording in the meeting ?
Hiro
On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 12:28:26 +0000 "Dillon, Chris" <c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear Edmon,
Beautifully clear and I like it very much. Thank you.
Regards,
Chris. == Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon
On 22/06/2015 09:21, "Edmon Chung" <edmon@registry.asia> wrote:
Suggestion for last sentence:
Label disposition assigned as a result of WLE cannot be reassigned.
Edmon
-----Original Message----- From: chinesegp-bounces@icann.org [mailto:chinesegp-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Dillon, Chris Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 6:45 PM To: hotta@jprs.co.jp Cc: ChineseGP@icann.org; KoreanGP@icann.org; JapaneseGP@icann.org Subject: Re: [ChineseGP] [Japanesegp] Redefinable
Dear Hiro,
It1s good to see the additional sentence and 3given to2, but 3redefinable2 needs attention, as it could mean redefining the existing dispositions (i.e. making them mean something else). The quick way to solve it is to ask Asmus what he meant and perhaps add a few words.
Regards,
Chris. == Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon
On 22/06/2015 07:34, "HiroHOTTA" <hotta@jprs.co.jp> wrote:
Dear Chris and all,
To be clearer, let me put 'given to' to the last sentence.
(3) Disposition Result of whole level evaluation (WLE). Disposition is assigned to a label, not to a character. In general, the Root zone process only allows the two dispositions 'allocatable' and 'blocked' (as well as 'invalid' for labels that are not valid at all). It is not possible to add new dispositions other than 'allocatable', 'blocked' and 'invalid'. And dispositions given to the labels are not redefinable.
Regards, Hiro
On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:03:29 +0900 HiroHOTTA <hotta@jprs.co.jp> wrote:
Thank you, Chris. It helps a lot.
> It is not possible to add new dispositions other than > 'allocatable', 'blocked' and 'invalid' I believe this is also correct and important as well. So, let us include the both in the definition statement.
I'll place the definition
(3) Disposition Result of whole level evaluation (WLE). Disposition is assigned to a label, not to a character. In general, the Root zone process only allows the two dispositions 'allocatable' and 'blocked' (as well as 'invalid' for labels that are not valid at all). It is not possible to add new dispositions other than 'allocatable', 'blocked' and 'invalid'. And dispositions for the labels are not redefinable.
in the terminology document and take it to the CJK+IP meeting today.
Hiro
On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:52:13 +0000 "Dillon, Chris" <c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk> wrote: > Dear Yoshiro and colleagues, > > I1d like to start a discussion about improving the last sentence of > terminology 3 (given in full below for context), along the lines mentioned > yesterday: > (3) Disposition > Result of whole level evaluation (WLE). Disposition is assigned to > a label, not to a character. In general, the Root zone process only allows > the two dispositions 3allocatable2 and 3blocked2 (as well as 3invalid2 for > labels that are not valid at all). And dispositions for the labels are > not redefinable. > > There was a feeling yesterday that 3reassignable2 may be better > than 3redefinable2, and 3assign2 was already used of 3disposition2 > in the second sentence in the paragraph. The meaning would then be > that dispositions cannot change as a result of some other process. > If, on the other hand, the meaning is that it is not possible to create > new dispositions, perhaps we could have something like: > It is not possible to add new dispositions other than > 3allocatable2, > 3blocked2 and 3invalid2. > > Regards, > > Chris. > == > > Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, > UCL, Gower > St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) > ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon > >
_______________________________________________ japanesegp mailing list japanesegp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/japanesegp
_______________________________________________ ChineseGP mailing list ChineseGP@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/chinesegp