Dear Amba,
Thank you for this extraordinary set of facilities.
I'm interested in what you refer to as "Sanity Checking". What is that?
Well, the Sanity checking is just to check if the annotation follows Paninian rules of grammar.
Since the annotation is manually edited, we would like to ensure that if an annotator changes the kāraka role, she also corrects the morphological analysis, if the selection by machine were wrong.
As a very trivial example, in the case of a neuter noun, if a word is marked as a kartā, then we must ensure that the nominative analysis is chosen, and not the accusative.
As you know, there is a great deal of textual variation lurking behind the nineteenth and twentieth century printed texts that we all depend on. How do you decide what a "text" is for your systems, since there is so much variation at the granular level? It doesn't look as if you are editing from manuscripts, unless Sanity Checking includes editorial activity.
We have chosen the version that is typically being used for teaching purposes. If there are variations, we are ignoring them at present.
The meta information for each book is being updated, and will be available in the next few days under the 'about' tab for each book.
For Ṛgveda, we represent the Sayaṇāchārya's interpretation.
For Mahābhārata, we have chosen the BORI's critical edition.
best,
Amba
--
Dominik Wujastyk, Professor Emeritus, Classical Indian History
University of Alberta
"The
University of Alberta is committed to the pursuit of truth,
the
advancement of learning, and the dissemination of knowledge
through
teaching, research and other scholarly and creative activities and
service."