Re: glossentry: DITA addon terminology question

The DITA spec says: "Each glossary entry <glossentry> topic defines a 
single sense of one term ... ". See 
http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/dita/v1.3/errata02/os/complete/part2-tech-content/archSpec/technicalContent/dita-glossary-topic.html#glossaryArch 
. This is sufficient for us to call <glossentry> a "glossary entry".

We, XMLmind Software, are not qualified to answer this kind of question. 
Please send questions about DITA and especially this kind of question to

[email protected]

(Home page: https://dita-users.groups.io/g/main )

There are a lot of DITA experts hanging out at this user group and they 
are very helpful.

Try it. You'll really like it!



On 4/7/20 9:34 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
> What is the basis for presenting 'glossentry' as 'glossary entry'? Why 
> not call it a 'gloss entry'? Does the DITA spec say anything about this?
> 
> This is perhaps a nerdy detail. But anyway: In the English localization 
> of the DITA addon for XMLmind XML Editor, as well as in “DITA for the 
> impatient"[1], the element 'glossentry', is referred to as “glossary 
> entry".
> 
> However, there actually is something called a ”gloss”. In fact, a 
> glossary is made up of glossES.[2] A single gloss is technically (or 
> perhaps I should say: traditionally) not called a glossary. You need two 
> glosses together - then you have a glossary. (Once again, see 
> Wikipedia[2].) That said, in the computer world, a group is sometimes 
> defined as consisting of «one or more» ... So a <glossentry> could 
> probably be labelled a 'glossary' in that sense. Except that a 
> <glossentry> can only represent a single gloss - so does not make sense 
> to call it a group = a glossary, even from a computer world perspective.
> 
> Now, you could perhaps argue that a glossary entry is exactly the same 
> as a gloss (entry): It is a single entry, regardless! One could as well 
> compare with the <dl> element, which - in DITA - requires a <dlentry>. 
> As an argument in favor of that comparison, we could bring the 
> <glossgroup> element into the discussion: That element takes one or more 
> <glossentry> as its content. And as such, <glossgroup> looks very 
> similar to <dl> (if we look away from the fact that <glossentry> may 
> contain a few specialized elements relevant to glossaries). In fact, on 
> the surface, the only difference I can see between <glossgroup> and 
> <dl>, is that the <glossentry> of the former can also be used alone, 
> outside its container element. Whereas, as far as I know, <dlentry> can 
> only occur inside <dl>.
> 
> But does it matter whether it is 'gloss entry' or 'glossary entry'? 
> Well, first, perhaps 'glossary entry' can live on. But at least knowing 
> that 'glossentry' might also be interpreted as 'gloss entry', opens up, 
> for me - as a localizer of XMLmind - some possible nuances in the 
> translation of 'glossary entry'.
> 
> [1] https://xmlmind.com/tutorials/DITA/index.html
> [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloss_(annotation)
> 
> Leif Halvard Silli

--
XMLmind XML Editor Support List
[email protected]
https://www.xmlmind.com/mailman/listinfo/xmleditor-support