<div dir="ltr">Chris,<div><br></div><div>I like that idea. It is definitely true that, while conversion between simplified and complex characters usually does an OK job, it often makes mistakes that would cause difficulty in search applications.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Matthew Patenaude</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 6:28 AM, Chris Burrell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:chris@burrell.me.uk" target="_blank">chris@burrell.me.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hi <div><br></div><div>Just wondering - do we want to allow Chinese to be searchable regardless of whether it is traditional or simplified.</div>
<div><br></div><div>There is a small library (<a href="https://code.google.com/p/java-zhconverter/" target="_blank">https://code.google.com/p/java-zhconverter/</a>) which does the conversion. My understanding is that traditional to simplified is unique, and simplified to traditional is not always unique (although the library I think only gives you one option).</div>
<div><br></div><div>My thought is that for chinese versions, we add the simplified/traditional options in the same field of the index so that we can prevent user errors (I've found myself raising a bug against Simplified Chinese not working, but it was because I had a traditional Chinese version selected.). We would never display these mappings, just use them to return results..</div>
<div><br></div><div>Just a thought.</div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div>Chris</div><div><br></div></font></span></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
jsword-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:jsword-devel@crosswire.org">jsword-devel@crosswire.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel" target="_blank">http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>