Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 +MMDF+MULTI+2.11; site icdoc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!seismo!mcvax!ukc!icdoc!cdsm
From: cdsm@icdoc.UUCP (Chris Moss)
Newsgroups: net.internat
Subject: Re: Hyphenation (mainly interactive)
Message-ID: <269@ivax.icdoc.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Dec-85 11:48:52 EST
Article-I.D.: ivax.269
Posted: Tue Dec  3 11:48:52 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 6-Dec-85 07:55:45 EST
References: <501@harvard.ARPA> <471@harvard.ARPA>
Reply-To: cdsm@icdoc.UUCP (Chris Moss)
Distribution: net
Organization: Dept. of Computing, Imperial College, London, UK.
Lines: 8
Xpath: icdoc ivax

There's a fallacy in assuming the hyphenation dictionary is "the standard
100% accurate authority" of course. That is, no two hyphenation dictionaries
I've seen agree with each other. Apart from traditional differences between
British & American practices, editors fail to agree on how the agreed "rules"
(many of which can conflict) apply. 

It seems an ideal area for work on automatic induction. Has anyone done
anything that anyone knows about?