TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2006-02 > 1138992701


From: Chris Sackett <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] End of Sentence Codes - a Second Proposal
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 18:51:41 +0000
References: <200623115135.547427@Terry3>
In-Reply-To: <200623115135.547427@Terry3>


Terry Reigel wrote:

> Thoughts? Comments? Would this do what users want it to do?

Terry,

This all sounds exactly right to me. Many thanks for all your work on
it. At first I had doubts about the need for [:SP:] as well as [:NC:],
figuring that maybe [:NC:] could have an automatic space built into it.
I was trying to think of an application where I would *not* want to have
a space. I then realised the extra options that your proposal offers.
Having the option to use [:NC:] without having to have a space means
output could be in the form:

list item 1;
list item 2;
list item 3.

I am sure the proposal will do all I had hoped it would. I've already
written my first paired sentence :-) :

[P] died <[M1]> <[L]> <[D]> [:NP:]
[:SP:][:NC:]and was buried <[L]> <[D]>

Actually, that raises a thought. If I had made the second tag sentence -
[:NC:] and was buried <[L]> <[D]>
(i.e. without the [:SP:] but with a space between [:NC:] and the next
following text, would that space be respected by the program, thus
avoiding the need to use [:SP:]?

Thanks again,
Regards,
Chris

This thread: