{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/funderburkjim/MWderivations/issues/3","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/funderburkjim/MWderivations","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/funderburkjim/MWderivations/issues/3/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/funderburkjim/MWderivations/issues/3/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/funderburkjim/MWderivations/issues/3/events","html_url":"https://github.com/funderburkjim/MWderivations/issues/3","id":167202733,"number":3,"title":"srs3 derivation method","user":{"login":"funderburkjim","id":6393033,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/6393033?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/funderburkjim","html_url":"https://github.com/funderburkjim","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/funderburkjim/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/funderburkjim/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/funderburkjim/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/funderburkjim/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/funderburkjim/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/funderburkjim/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/funderburkjim/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/funderburkjim/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/funderburkjim/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/funderburkjim/MWderivations/labels/Documentation","name":"Documentation","color":"0e8a16"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2016-07-23T20:46:33Z","updated_at":"2016-07-23T20:46:33Z","closed_at":null,"body":"In examining some of the `TODO` cases mentioned in #2 ,  cases like `acCe@tya` seemed to have\r\nan easy derivation, namely `acCa+itya`.  \r\n\r\nWhy was this derivation not found by the `srs2` method ?\r\n\r\nThe reason turns out to be that\r\n* The srs2 method requires the first element (`acCa`) to be the *parent* of `acce@tya`.\r\n* acce@tya is an H2, and the parent (the previous H1 entry) is, in the current digitization of MW,\r\n  the word `acCambawkArAya`. Here is part of the hierarchy of entries:\r\n  ```\r\n1   1866   acCa   acCa   \r\n1   1866.1   acCawASabda   acCawA-Sabda   \r\n1   1866.2   acCawAsaMGAta   acCawA-saMGAta   \r\n1   1866.3   acCandaska   a-cCandaska   \r\n1   1866.4   acCambawkArAya   a-cCambawkArAya   \r\n2   1867   acCAi   acCAi   \r\n numerous other H2 entries omitted\r\n2   1888   acCAsf   acCAsf   \r\n2   1889   acCAsyand   acCAsyand   \r\n2   1890   acCeta   acCe@ta   \r\n2   1891   acCetya   acCe@tya   \r\n\r\n  ```\r\n   Since the parent is not `acCa`, the srs2 method failed.\r\n\r\nNote:  Those 4 H1 headwords `acCawASabda` through `acCambawkArAya` are from the\r\n  supplement to MW.  It could be argued that they should be coded as H2.  If this were done, then\r\n  the srs2 analysis of acCeta and acCetya would succeed (with the same derivations, `acca+ita` and\r\n  `acCa+itya` as currently provided by the srs3 analysis.\r\n\r\n"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"funderburkjim"}}