Re: [dict-beta] DICT in the SF trove

[Piotr B. <ba...@o2...>]

Ah, let me clarify, because possibly I haven't stressed this enough in
my previous message:

> Do you propose to ask sf guys to add new categor[y|ies] for software
> related to dictionary software?

Not to dictionary software in general -- I was thinking of a much more
specific category, for DICT alone. That's why I was wondering where DICT
fits best, in the context of their tree-like category system.

This is not merely a theoretical issue, it has practical consequences
for category-based searching:

https://sourceforge.net/search/?type_of_search=soft&words=

(look on the right)


It seems to me that the main stress is not so much on the database
format as on the query protocol:

* curl might be an extreme example of that:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/curl/

"Curl is a tool and libcurl is a library for transferring data with URL
syntax, supporting FTP, FTPS, HTTP, HTTPS, TFTP, SCP, SFTP, TELNET,
DICT, LDAP. LDAPS and FILE. libcurl offers a myriad of powerful features
and full protocol control."

* qdict notices the difference: https://sourceforge.net/projects/qdict/

"QDICT Dictionary is a client software used to access local and distant
dictionaries (from DICT format or with the DICT protocol)."

* and tinydict possibly only cares about the format, or the description
is inaccurate: https://sourceforge.net/projects/tinydict/

"Tiny C++ library to use dictionary files in .dict format (see
http://www.dict.org)Small code footprint (20K) and small RAM required to
work (64K + index file size / 16). Depends on zlib only. "

I have now gone through all the project descriptions that a search for
"DICT" returns (36, wow!) and concluded that a great majority of them
stresses DICT as a protocol rather than database format. So maybe that's
a start.

Cheers,

  Piotr