in reply to Computer-readable thesaurus

For some value of `easy' you can always use LWP, HTML::TreeBuilder, and something like Merriam-Webster Online. Not perl but a starting place with the urls, these are some zsh functions I use:

webster () {
        _gensearch $0 "http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=" "$*"
}

thesaurus () {
        _gensearch $0 "http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/thesaurus?va=" "$*"
}

[download]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Computer-readable thesaurus
by tstock (Curate) on Oct 12, 2001 at 21:17 UTC
    I'm pretty sure Merrian-Webster online would not like people bypassing their ad revenue in this fashion.

    I know I pay for the bandwidth on my site, and spend some time blocking agents that steal my content like that.

    contact publishers before 'using' their work is my advice.

    Tiago

    Update:
    I'm sorry if this was read as flame bait, not my intention. I'm not sorry to have brought up copyright and terms of service. This is not a technical issue, but a moral and sometimes legal one, that developers should be aware of when making agents for the web.

    For example, using most Finance::Quote:: modules are against the terms of service of the sites who provide this data.
[reply]

      I'm sure they'd also not like for people to use lynx, which doesn't display adds. I'm sure they'd like for people not to use junkbuster or other ad-blocking proxies. I'm sure they'd like for people to mail them large envelopes full of cash.

      But they've put up their content on a publicly accessable web site. They're perfectly welcome (as are you) to implement whatever technological means to restrict access (of course most of those won't stop a truly determined person with the right know-how, but that's another issue :). But I see little reason to ask for permission to provide an URL which any webmonkey worth his bananas could deduce in under a minute with just a browser's `View Source' functionality. That URL does not magically give you any more access to their content than the form on their front page, just more convinient access.

      But this is getting off topic from the original question at hand.

[reply]
        response to 1st paragraph:
        I'll engage in a honest, no flames, "is blocking ads morally acceptable" anytime, but perlmonks is probably not the place.

        2nd paragraph
        The permission I mentioned was for use of the content, not for giving technical specs. I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear. This is the same warning that comes(?) with Finance::Quote modules.
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom