From ed0291787821f9fd65a9023586e6ece0d315a16d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alexander Bocken Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 18:25:28 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] updated TODO --- TODO.md | 17 ----------------- 1 file changed, 17 deletions(-) diff --git a/TODO.md b/TODO.md index 2c1ad7f..3ee0128 100644 --- a/TODO.md +++ b/TODO.md @@ -2,23 +2,6 @@ | Word | Occurence | Explanation | | :---------------- | :-------- | :---------------------- | -| deposition | no.1742 | add linebreak between 2nd and 3rd meaning | -| disuetude | no.1743 | expl.: `"disuse","no longer custim"` -> ` "disuse", "no longer custim"` | -| dissolute | no.366 | maybe add: `Ant: resolute` in expl. | -| formidable | no.1440 | underline starts too soon in first example. Also, that example is not clear in meaning imo, could also be used as in the 2nd meaning in that context. | -| embroider | no.1288 | end of bold delimiter missing | -| gibe | no.1569 | Explanation has a weird "yn1" | -| daphanous | no.1746 | word misspelled in example, numbering of examples with only one example present. | -| diffidence | no.1747 | we already have diffident | -| edacious | no.1754 | no numbering for first example, add space after "1b." for 2nd example. | -| ensign | no.1756 | `2.` -> `2. ` in examples | -| extrinsic | no.1406 | remove numbering in meaning (but not in examples) | -| fecund | no.1760 | add linebreak between meanings | -| acolyte | no.1421 | add numbering to 2nd example | -| flak | no.1763 | add linebreak between meanings (also: look at 2nd meaning, there seems to be a mistake there) | -| impudent | no.414 | two categories of synonyms in explanation but only one meaning? | -| superficial | no.693 | aren't the three different meanings basically the exact same one but applied to different areas/ideas? | -| forge | no.1767 | add linebreaks between meanings | | whittle | no.815 | add sub-numbering i.e. (1.a, 1.b) | | fulgurate | no.731 | meaning: `2:` -> `2.` | | congruity | no.974 | end of underline missing in example. Also: remove numbering? Synonyms should only be listed in explanation, not example. |