You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Would it be possible to enable more customization/simpler output for definition fields?
Here is a note generated for 読む:
It would be nice if it could be simplified to just something like this:
Or even, ideally, this:
Improvements that would be nice are:
allocating the "Note" info in the glossary to the designated notes field
ability to choose how many different meanings to be added to the note (or just the most frequent one)
ability to remove the tags at the top (★high priority entryv5mvt) as well as all the other formatting (the numbered list format for entries and the bullet point separators)
ability to allocate the example sentences to a different field on the note
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
allocating the "Note" info in the glossary to the designated notes field
What do you mean by this?
ability to choose how many different meanings to be added to the note (or just the most frequent one)
Currently if you want you can choose to send only the first glossary to the card using one of the glossary-first handlebars.
ability to remove the tags at the top (★high priority entryv5mvt) as well as all the other formatting (the numbered list format for entries and the bullet point separators)
For the tags, use one of the glossary-brief handlebars. As for the numbered list, how would you expect dictionary glosses to be separated? And likewise what do you expect to be used to separate entries in the same dict?
ability to allocate the example sentences to a different field on the note
Would it be possible to enable more customization/simpler output for definition fields?
Here is a note generated for 読む:
It would be nice if it could be simplified to just something like this:
Or even, ideally, this:
Improvements that would be nice are:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: