Streams by this user that have been favorited by others.
No favorited streams yet.
LaTeX. That's a thing I should probably be more familiar with...
I like really impressed by how useful a well designed Markdown editor can be in previewing the final result.
Why can't we have the same thing for linguistics.
Imagine what a basic CFG syntax markdown could look like. I could write simple rules:
S --> NP VP
NP --> Det N
VP --> V NP
And they'd just be converted into a simple tree in the preview just like that (without lexical items in notes).
And we could have:
[.S [.NP Something ] [.VP [.V like ] [.NP this ] ] ]
There's no reason why not.
I'm also experimenting with other Markdown editors. It's a little disappointing that the pickings for Windows are pretty slim.
Over the weekend I switched my website writing (writing on websites not writing websites #genitivefail) from Open Live Writer to Typora.
Seems like a positive step toward better use of Markdown.
And some means of displaying xml data in a useful fashion...
I'm just beginning to start on a bit of a journey, a metaphorical one, of course, whereby I learn some basic coding skills.
Those are the starter goals. I know some about XML already. I regularly open up XML files in notepad++ to give the structure a looksee. I also know some HTML simply from 10 years of blogging...and I've picked up some Markdown just by happenstance.
We'll see where this goes...
Thoughts by this user that have been liked by others.
No liked thoughts yet.