[Trennmuster] Railroad diagram first complete version

[Stephan Hennig]

Am 18.11.2013 10:55, schrieb Guenter Milde:
>> > Am 15.11.2013 14:56, schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
> 
>>> > > . Hyphen:
>>> > > 
>>> > >   - Neither the order nor the number of the elements are not fixed.
>>> > >     In other words, something like `=|' is also valid, meaning the
>>> > >     same as `|='.
> 
>> > That should be stated in the file dateikopf.  
> 
>> > On the other hand, I'm fine with only |= being valid.  
> 
> This is how I intended it to be.

OK.


>> BTW, what about multiple mixed
>> hyphenation mark-up, e.g., ||- or |--?  Is that valid?
> 
> It does not make sense so we should not use it.

OK.


> Mixed markup makes only sense to override the fixed order
> 
>      B(-) > B(|) > B(=)
>      
> for the affinity B of hyphenation points.
> 
> In my understanding, there are only two use cases for mixed markup, the ones
> explicitely listed:
> 
> # Das gemischte Trennzeichen »|=« kennzeichnet die Bindungverhältnisse,
> # wenn sich ein echter Präfix auf das gesamte folgende Kompositum bezieht:
> #
> #   un|=wahr=schein-lich  un + (wahr + scheinlich)

To cite from another section:

  =  an Wortfugen (zwischen Grundmorphemen): Wort=fu-ge

Is 'scheinlich' a Grundmorphem?  It's not a valid stand-alone word.


> #
> # Das gemischte Trennzeichen »-=« kennzeichnet die Bindungsverhältnisse,
> # wenn sich beispielsweise ein Suffix auf das gesamte vorhergehende
> # Kompositum bezieht
> #
> #   an-dert=halb-=fach     ((an+dert) + halb) + fach
> 
> This that a mixed hyphenation marker is one of
> 
>    |=  |==  |=== ...
>    -=  -==  -=== ...
>    
> i.e. one of `|' or `-' followed by any number of `='.

OK, I've implemented that in the validation script.

Best regards,
Stephan Hennig