Note: this is different from merging lexemes, as senses are not seperate pages.
Description
Description
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duplicate | None | T168797 Allow merging senses | |||
| Duplicate | None | T168795 Allow merging lexemes |
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
We just started implementing this project, but can already tell this is not going to work, at least not without bot assistance. Senses are elements of a lexeme. You can not "merge senses" for the same reason you can not "merge statements".
Comment Actions
Sense is a gloss, plus group of statements. Clearly there will be redundant or duplicated senses. How to deal with them should be considered. For example:
L1: apple (English, noun)
L1-S1: (en) tree of the genus Malus
Statement: translation, example sentences, hypernym ...
L1-S2: (de) Baum der Gattung Malus
Statement: translation, example sentences ...
Now please consider how to deal with this. Yes we may delete the duplicate sense, but it's better to move statements to the other.
Yes merging senses is conceptally different from merging items or lexemes. It is merging glosses plus combining the list of statements. We should also consider how to do if the senses are refered by other entities, as senses are not independent page and thus can not be redirected. (but we can implantate a kind of "internal redirect": replace the merged sense with a kind of "stub" entry including a "symbolic" link to other senses (indicating the content is located in other senses), and existing links will not be broken.)
Comment Actions
Hey @Bugreporter :)
You're right that we need to think about this. Thanks for bringing it up. I'll leave the ticket closed for now because we already have so many tickets open and we're still quite a bit away from the point where we can work on this. Please leave comments here though if you have any more ideas about it. I'll keep them in mind for when we get further in the project.