[liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: An example of what I think should work but doesn't.
- From: Dave Mielke <dave@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:05:01 -0500
[quoted lines by Bert Frees on 2017/01/10 at 11:15 +0100]
Thanks for the test.
While that test is still valid for a failure in multipass back translation, the
approach I used won't work anyway since translation is done into a different
buffer so I'm now working on a new approach.
But I need some more explanation. You are testing
back-translation, yet you expect that the pass2 rules match?
They're in a table only used for back translation.
Also in another email you said:
Another thing that was confusing me is the multipass order when back
translating. So, just in case others don't know, it looks like its pass4,
then
pass3, then pass2, then context, then back translation. Although I
haven't yet
checked, I suspect that correct, if present, is done last.
How did you get to this conclusion?
By writing a bunch of test rules and then running lou_trace.
I don't know the back-translation code,
but I would expect the multipass rules to be applied in reverse somehow
(either that or not at all).
They're applied. The passes are reversed but, within a pass, the rules are
aplied in the same order as for forward translation.
--
Dave Mielke | 2213 Fox Crescent | The Bible is the very Word of God.
Phone: 1-613-726-0014 | Ottawa, Ontario |
http://Mielke.cc/bible/
EMail: Dave@xxxxxxxxx | Canada K2A 1H7 |
http://FamilyRadio.org/
For a description of the software, to download it and links to
project pages go to
http://liblouis.org
Other related posts:
