Re: FW: Dictionaries, practical question

Dear colleagues


For us the advantages of exist are: you can do anything in it to get 
your data on a webpage in it and it is straight forward to set up on a 
server. You even have an integrated development environment locally or 
on your server. You can choose to have RESTxq or some more exist 
specific approach to HTML creation. The disadvantages are: Setup is 
really a setup process that creates a service on your computer and you 
have to install additional packages or compile something if you have bad 
luck. Some buggy corner cases (whitespace handling) will be fixed in the 
upcoming version hopefully. Also note there is no open bugfixing after a 
major release. You have to pay enterprise support prices for that.

The advantage of BaseX is: It is really trivial to get your first 
database running. Download a jar and start it. Any webpage is just a 
variety of a RESTxq service. It seems they make great but non breaking 
progress and don't charge you anything for updates. We did not run into 
any strange bugs yet. The disadvantages are: Server setup differs 
significantly. There is no shipped development environment on the 
server, the GUI you have in the standalone version can not be used with 
the server.

We definitly want to use both in the future or even get rid of exist-db 
if the bugs we see and need elaborate workarounds for don't get fixed soon.


Best Regards

Omar Siam


Am 15.01.2017 um 22:15 schrieb Daniel STOEKL BEN EZRA:
> Dear colleagues
> May I ask those who have tried BaseX AND eXist what are the advantages 
> of using eXist compared to BaseX or, vice versa, the advantages of 
> BaseX compared to eXist? What can you do in eXist which you cannot do 
> in BaseX or the other way round?
> Many thanks
> Daniel
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) public discussion list 
> [[email protected]] on behalf of Christian Grün 
> [[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Friday, January 13, 2017 12:10 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: Dictionaries, practical question
>
> Hi Charly,
>
> sorry for the confusion. I was simply stupid enough to pass my mail on 
> back to you and the list while it was rather meant to be forwarded to 
> some other guys in the TEI area. ;) I am glad to hear that VLE 
> benefits from BaseX!
>
> Cheers
> Christian
>
>
>
>
> Am 13.01.2017 11:43 schrieb "Mörth, Karlheinz" 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>:
>
>     You are right, and to be precise, it should be "makes heavily use
>     of the BaseX database" or "builds on the BaseX database"
>
>     We actually see in the move away from traditional architectures
>     (CLIENT - PHP/PERL/PYTHON - relational database) towards REST in
>     combination with BaseX an important step forward which is due -
>     among others - to the fact that BaseX is so straightforward to set
>     up. The 'monolingual' XML-only architecture (XSLT, XML SCHEMA,
>     XQuery) turned out to be a big advantage. Getting others to create
>     a functioning environment has become much more feasible like this.
>     BaseX also proved to be very efficient in querying and stable
>     during operation.
>
>     All the best
>
>     Charly
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: Christian Grün [mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>]
>     Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 4:42 PM
>     To: Mörth, Karlheinz <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Cc: tei-l <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Subject: Re: Dictionaries, practical question
>
>     VLE (dictionary writing system), »recent versions are tightly
>     integrated with the BaseX«…
>     ____________________________________
>
>     On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Mörth, Karlheinz
>     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     wrote:
>     > Hi Paul,
>     >
>     > There is an incomplete but helpful list on Wikipedia:
>     > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary_writing_system
>     <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary_writing_system>
>     >
>     > Are you aware of the following very interesting document? It was
>     created as part of the ENEL (European Network of e-Lexicography)
>     Cost Action by very experienced experts in the field (Abel, Krek,
>     Tiberius): Bibliography –Dictionary Writing Systems (DWS) &
>     related software
>     >
>     http://www.elexicography.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Bibliography_DWS_CQS_v7_web.pdf
>     <http://www.elexicography.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Bibliography_DWS_CQS_v7_web.pdf>
>     >
>     > The Viennese Lexicographic Editor (VLE) is a Windows standalone
>     application which we have been developing for quite some time now.
>     Several smaller dictionaries were done with it. The most recent
>     one is:
>     >
>     https://basex-dev.eos.arz.oeaw.ac.at/dict_api/tunico/tunis_dict__v002.html
>     <https://basex-dev.eos.arz.oeaw.ac.at/dict_api/tunico/tunis_dict__v002.html>
>     (prod. server; link will change)
>     >
>     > Others you can find on the Vienna-Corpus-of-Arabic-Varieties
>     (VICAV) website:
>     > https://vicav.acdh.oeaw.ac.at
>     >
>     > VLE is a general-purpose XML editor enhanced by functionalities
>     typically needed in editing lexical data. We have compiled all our
>     dictionaries in TEI. If you want to see details of the encoding,
>     have a look here:
>     > https://clarin.oeaw.ac.at/lrp/dict-gate/docs.html
>     <https://clarin.oeaw.ac.at/lrp/dict-gate/docs.html>
>     >
>     > VLE makes use of various XML technologies, e.g. XSLT, XPath,
>     XQuery. It has a number of useful features which were needed in
>     our projects (validation against XML Schema, visualisation through
>     customizable XSLT in all parts of the system, sound recording
>     etc). Recent versions are tightly integrated with the BaseX
>     database which makes it easy to set up local instances. We also
>     have implemented versioning. It comes with a tokenEditor that
>     allows to furnish corpora with dictionary IDs. Recently we have
>     been working on an Application Creator module which helps to
>     create web applications by means of a very simple wizard.
>     >
>     > Due to time pressure, VLE is still scarcely documented although
>     we have been working on this. It is freely available. If you want
>     to try it, get in touch. I am happy to help. VLE is an ongoing
>     project.
>     >
>     > All the best
>     >
>     > Charly
>     > ________________________________________________
>     > Karlheinz Moerth
>     > Austrian Centre for Digital Humanities
>     > Austrian Academy of Sciences
>     > Sonnenfelsgasse 19/2nd floor
>     > 1010 Wien
>     > Tel: +43 1 51581-2220 <tel:%2B43%201%2051581-2220>
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > -----Original Message-----
>     > From: TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) public discussion list
>     [mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Piotr Banski
>     > Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 11:22 PM
>     > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     > Subject: Re: Dictionaries, practical question
>     >
>     > I have worked with FLEx and FLEx-generated XML, first preparing
>     a large
>     > corpus-derived dictionary for FLEx ingestion and then iterating
>     on that.
>     > It can be done with only a minor headache as you learn the
>     underlying
>     > format and then e.g. discover the differences between particular
>     versions.
>     >
>     > I don't really see an ontological platform for comparing FLEx
>     vs. TEI.
>     > FLEx is a 'machine`, TEI is a metaformat. I'd take FLEx for
>     > lexicographic work and then worry about potential export to TEI (or
>     > rather transformation from FLEx export). Or even attempt to go both
>     > ways, if the initial data are in TEI, but then, maintaining
>     references
>     > could be a challenge.
>     >
>     > I have planned to check out the Viennese Lexicographic
>     Editor[1], and
>     > even managed to run it under Linux, but got stuck afterwards. It is
>     > definitely worth trying for some lexicographic tasks, especially
>     when
>     > it's gotten more documentation.
>     >
>     > [1] http://www.oeaw.ac.at/acdh/de/vle
>     <http://www.oeaw.ac.at/acdh/de/vle>
>     >
>     > Good luck,
>     >
>     >    Piotr
>     >
>     >
>     > On 01/11/2017 10:55 PM, Patrick Sahle wrote:
>     >>
>     >> I had a similar discussion only today: a colleague wants to
>     create from
>     >> a 18th century manuscript a multi language lexicon using
>     FieldWorks/FLEx
>     >> (http://fieldworks.sil.org/). I tried to convince him on the
>     advantages
>     >> using TEI would have but didn't get through. I see his
>     arguments for an
>     >> easy to use tool that is established in his field. But I am
>     concerned
>     >> about the loss of information about the material, visual and
>     structural
>     >> aspects of the documents. We are now discussing into two
>     directions:
>     >> - would it be possible to convert from FLEx to (sufficiently
>     information
>     >> rich) TEI in the end? Mainly for interoperability reasons ...
>     >> - would it be wise to go from TEI to FLEx (keeping more
>     information from
>     >> the documents, but working without an easy editing tool)?
>     >>
>     >> Any experiences on this around?
>     >>
>     >> Best, Patrick
>     >>
>     >> Am 11.01.2017 um 16:37 schrieb Paul Schaffner:
>     >>> Hi all, this is not strictly TEI, as you'll see, but I suspect
>     there are
>     >>> a number of lexicographers here. I was asked yesterday by someone
>     >>> compiling a Latin dictionary if there was a standard (perhaps
>     >>> database-type) piece of application software in which to
>     compile, edit,
>     >>> and search it. He is (sigh) using Microsoft Word at the
>     moment, and has
>     >>> rejected the usual filemaker-type databases as not sufficiently
>     >>> supportive of word-processor-type formatting (multiple
>     languages and
>     >>> fonts, etc.) I of course pointed out that the chief
>     desideratum for
>     >>> future functionality was to distinguish unambiguously between
>     different
>     >>> structurally distinct pieces of each entry; that XML was a
>     good vehicle
>     >>> for recording the sort of mixture of fielded, normalized and
>     free-form
>     >>> text typical of dictionaries; that XML could be entered,
>     searched, and
>     >>> edited in any number of applications, from Access forms to
>     simple text
>     >>> editors; and that TEI did have a functional dictionaries
>     module which
>     >>> was worth considering. I am investigating further as to what
>     he actually
>     >>> hopes to do with the data, which makes a big difference.
>     >>>
>     >>> But in the meantime: is there in fact a popular software
>     choice amongst
>     >>> working lexicographers? (To the extent that anything used by
>     >>> lexicographers could be called 'popular'!)
>     >>>
>     >>> pfs
>     >>>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> --
>     >>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     >> Apl. Prof. Dr. Patrick Sahle
>     >> Koordinierungsstelle Digital Humanities der Nordrhein-Westfälischen
>     >> Akademie der Wissenschaften
>     >> Cologne Center for eHumanities (CCeH)
>     <http://www.cceh.uni-koeln.de/>
>     >> Data Center for the Humanities <http://www.dch.uni-koeln.de/>
>     >> DiXiT ITN <http://www.dixit.uni-koeln.de/
>     <http://www.dixit.uni-koeln.de/>>
>     >> Institut für Dokumentologie und Editorik <http://www.i-d-e.de>
>     >>
>     >> Postanschrift: Cologne Center for eHumanities (CCeH),
>     Universität zu
>     >> Köln, Albertus-Magnus-Platz, D-50923 Köln
>     >> Büro: Meister-Ekkehart-Str. 11, Raum 2.04; Telefon: +49 -
>     (0)221 - 470 3894 <tel:%2B49%20-%20%280%29221%20-%20470%203894>
>     >
>     > --
>     > Piotr Bański, Ph.D.
>     > Senior Researcher,
>     > Institut für Deutsche Sprache,
>     > R5 6-13
>     > 68-161 Mannheim, Germany
>
>