Regex examples

[Jellby]

Change * to *? and it will only catch until ‘bout.

Still, you don't want to miss any of those, you could also have:

‘em the cat sat on the mat ‘foo ‘bout’

My suggestion is running either of the regexes and replace every instance with something else (say ¬rsquo; or ¬lsquo;, literally) so you can be sure you have checked all of them and they don't stand in the way. Once there's nothing left, replace them back with ‘ and ’.

[Skeeve]

Originally Posted by Jellby

Change * to *? and it will only catch until ‘bout.

Still, you don't want to miss any of those, you could also have:

‘em the cat sat on the mat ‘foo ‘bout’

Maybe I do not know enough about correct quoting in english, but couldn't this be one of these 3 interpretations?

1. ‘em the cat sat on the mat ‘foo ‘bout’
2. ‘em the cat sat on the mat ‘foo ‘bout’
3. ‘em the cat sat on the mat ‘foo ‘bout’

[Jellby]

Originally Posted by Skeeve

Maybe I do not know enough about correct quoting in english, but couldn't this be one of these 3 interpretations?

1. ‘em the cat sat on the mat ‘foo ‘bout’
2. ‘em the cat sat on the mat ‘foo ‘bout’
3. ‘em the cat sat on the mat ‘foo ‘bout’

Yep, that's why you need a human who understands the language and knows that 'em and 'bout are contractions, so the correct form is:

’em the cat sat on the mat ‘foo ’bout’

[Steadyhands]

Thanks all,

I've since been building a search group in sigil with entries like these.

‘em([\p{P}|\s])
\‘([Cc])ause([\p{P}|\s])
\‘([Bb])out([\p{P}|\s])
etc. etc

This catches the common ones and I'm using the others from here as a second pass.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by Jellby

Yep, that's why you need a human who understands the language and knows that 'em and 'bout are contractions, so the correct form is:

’em the cat sat on the mat ‘foo ’bout’

That is what " vs. ' is about. If used properly there should be no confusion.

Dale

[Jellby]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

That is what " vs. ' is about. If used properly there should be no confusion.

Dale

Do you mean that, even when one is using single quotes in a book, double quotes should be used for this?

'em the cat sat on the mat "foo 'bout"

[Toxaris]

I thought the double quotes were more US-style and single quotes more UK-style.

[mrmikel]

It is confusing because apostrophe is used in contractions, but is also used in quotes within quotes ie Bill said,"You know John said, 'Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.' and then walked away." It also depends on the time the book was written too. One of the worst things about English is that most of it is irregular and the rest is borrowed from other languages.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by Toxaris

I thought the double quotes were more US-style and single quotes more UK-style.

Yes, but both use the opposite quotes for nesting and to avoid confusion. I suspect the reason the US starts with double quotes is that there is more likely to be contractions, but that is only conjecture. Neither country uses one or the other exclusively.

Dale

[Skeeve]

There are so many quotes one could use:

„German style“
„German Style ‚with quoted quotes‘ look like this“
»German Chevrons ›with quoted‹ quote«
«Swiss Guillemets ‹with quoted› quote»
« French guillemets ‹ with quoted › quote »

I think there is more…

[Divingduck]

Yes, please:

„German style”
„German Style ‚with quoted quotes’ look like this”

[Toxaris]

Originally Posted by Skeeve

There are so many quotes one could use:

„German style“
„German Style ‚with quoted quotes‘ look like this“
»German Chevrons ›with quoted‹ quote«
«Swiss Guillemets ‹with quoted› quote»
« French guillemets ‹ with quoted › quote »

I think there is more…

There are more variations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...uotation_marks and that list is not even complete if you look at history. For example in an obscure period some publishers used Guillemets in Dutch books. Quite rare, but they do exist. Most word processors that support smart quotes only support one kind per country alas.
I had to take all into account in my programming and make it user selectable due to this.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by Toxaris

There are more variations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...uotation_marks and that list is not even complete if you look at history. For example in an obscure period some publishers used Guillemets in Dutch books. Quite rare, but they do exist. Most word processors that support smart quotes only support one kind per country alas.
I had to take all into account in my programming and make it user selectable due to this.

Even in English I have seen cases where double quotes were contained inside curly double quotes. In addition to the double/single switching alternately.

[brunello]

First of all, I apologize for my English.
I have 2 problems that I would like to solve with regex:

1) Can I replace all the broken words (for example: hou-se), except for a list of words to ignore (for example: hang-up)?

2) How can I highlight only the last word of a paragraph?
I tried with "\ s \ w +. </ p>" but unfortunately does not see special characters, such as "à" or "»"


thanks

[mzmm]

Originally Posted by brunello

1) Can I replace all the broken words (for example: hou-se), except for a list of words to ignore (for example: hang-up)?

not really a way to reasonably exclude words. if you're breaks are always between two letters you may as well just search for a hyphen using 'Replace/Find' in Sigil. it'd probably only take a few minutes.

Originally Posted by brunello

2) How can I highlight only the last word of a paragraph?
I tried with "\ s \ w +. </ p>" but unfortunately does not see special characters, such as "à" or "»"

this should work for #2:

(?<=\s)[^\s<]+(?=</p>)

it's looking for:

one or more of anything that is not a space or a <
[^\s<]+

which is preceded by a space
(?<=\s)

and which is followed by a </p>
(?=</p>)

hope that helps!