06-10-2016, 09:41 AM
Hi Ruby - thanks for giving it a try.
My intention is for people to use this tool when they want to present their analyses of the manuscript in a way that other people can replicate them.
My experience with Voynich Manuscript research is that there are plenty of people who make claims of interpretation - even very basic ones - but fail to present a) their source data, and b) their methodology.
I have a problem with people who are not presenting data and methodology because I believe they are contributing to the bad reputation that surrounds the study of this manuscript.
We need to address this, and my contribution is to provide an opportunity for researchers to present their analysis in a transparent and repeatable way.
The API is based on Jorge Stolfi's interlinear file that can be easily downloaded from his website. I present my parsing method on the documentation page. My intention is to share the parsing source code as an open source effort so it is clear how I handled it. Broadly, it follows the rules articulated within the file itself, plus I've added bits of interpretation from wider reading e.g. Rene Zandbergen's website and so forth.
I accept the criticism that there is a quite high barrier to entry for using this tool. To use this tool, you will need to be comfortable with coding, and also comfortable with presenting that code.
I also accept the criticism that the source code for the parser and API is not currently available. I am totally happy to share, and will get round to putting it up on the internet very soon.
The samples on the website are intended to demonstrate how people can go about using the API. Therefore, my response to your comment that you want to combine words, is that you should look into how you might code this and then contribute that methodology back to the research community so people can build upon your work.
Good luck with your research,
Robin
My intention is for people to use this tool when they want to present their analyses of the manuscript in a way that other people can replicate them.
My experience with Voynich Manuscript research is that there are plenty of people who make claims of interpretation - even very basic ones - but fail to present a) their source data, and b) their methodology.
I have a problem with people who are not presenting data and methodology because I believe they are contributing to the bad reputation that surrounds the study of this manuscript.
We need to address this, and my contribution is to provide an opportunity for researchers to present their analysis in a transparent and repeatable way.
The API is based on Jorge Stolfi's interlinear file that can be easily downloaded from his website. I present my parsing method on the documentation page. My intention is to share the parsing source code as an open source effort so it is clear how I handled it. Broadly, it follows the rules articulated within the file itself, plus I've added bits of interpretation from wider reading e.g. Rene Zandbergen's website and so forth.
I accept the criticism that there is a quite high barrier to entry for using this tool. To use this tool, you will need to be comfortable with coding, and also comfortable with presenting that code.
I also accept the criticism that the source code for the parser and API is not currently available. I am totally happy to share, and will get round to putting it up on the internet very soon.
The samples on the website are intended to demonstrate how people can go about using the API. Therefore, my response to your comment that you want to combine words, is that you should look into how you might code this and then contribute that methodology back to the research community so people can build upon your work.
Good luck with your research,
Robin
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)