You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In the entry for ἅγιος, e.g., in the original style using @n:
<entry n="ἅγιος|G40|G39">
In the 'lemma' file, the first Strong's number stays with the headword in the @lemma attribute, while only the second Strong's number is moved to the @strong attribute:
<entry lemma="ἅγιος|G40" strong="G39">
Would the answer be to to have all Strong's numbers in the @Strong attribute, separated by |?
Once we decide how to handle these cases, I may be able to implement a way to derive the @lemma form of the dictionary (which cannot validate against our schema) from the @n form of the text, thus avoiding the possibility of content differences between the two.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In the entry for ἅγιος, e.g., in the original style using
@n
:In the 'lemma' file, the first Strong's number stays with the headword in the
@lemma
attribute, while only the second Strong's number is moved to the@strong
attribute:Would the answer be to to have all Strong's numbers in the @Strong attribute, separated by
|
?Once we decide how to handle these cases, I may be able to implement a way to derive the
@lemma
form of the dictionary (which cannot validate against our schema) from the@n
form of the text, thus avoiding the possibility of content differences between the two.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: