wikimedia-l | wikisource-l | meta | mediawiki | Phabricator | feedback

On ellipsis and dots


#1

Is there a difference between ellipsis, three dots, four dots, and lots-of-dots?
Should the ellipsis character “” be used for all of these?
Should the number of transcribed dots equal exactly the number of dots in the original scan?

Any ideas? :slight_smile: Thanks!


#2

i use ellipsis, and add periods as indicated .
for example on this page https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Panchatantra.djvu/97

if it is a document style issue, just be consistent, make a note on index talk page
in tables there are templates for these
for section end, there are templates

i went looking for help and i could not find.
the transcription help button is better for more general topics


#3

Yes, good point about consistency within a work; I certainly aim for that.

In your example, a comma followed by four full stops, it’s been transcribed as just that — no ellipsis and no templates.


I would have done the same, but used the {{...|4}} template because it makes the dots “no-wrap” so they will always stick together on one line.

Which is really why I raised this thread here, because I’m starting to think that there might not be much point in using the ellipsis character ever! People on typewriters use dots, people with pens use dots… who apart from the unicode consortium has ever used a single three-dot character? :wink: (I’m sort of being facetious.)


#4

yes in this example the center should prevent the no wrap, but an ellipsis alone should work too. it is a rare occurrence for section ends. i tend to see *** instead, and use the template for equal spacing. might prefer dots over template, since templates take more memory.

wikisource tends to be un-doctrinaire about such things.