Hi Mike,

>
>CPD = ? Concise Pali Dictionary ? which we would find where?
>
>What's wrong with the structure I am suggesting? It has this advantage: with
>small changes, it is currently in use at ATI (and in what I am doing)...not
>that that should be the determining factor, which should be clarity.

As far as I can tell the CPD (Critical Pali Dictionary) scheme
doesn't directly compete with large parts of the one you proposed,
since yours also makes place for Dhamma talks and other articles than
the original literature. The CPD is a way of organizing the Pali
literature only (and some relevant Sanskrit literature).

I haven't seen the whole scheme (which I believe is explained in the
first fascicle of the CPD) only the parts cited in the Index Locorum
of Helmer Smith's Saddaniiti edition. Still, that's quite a lot of
material. From there,it's apparent that:

1.x.x Vinaya
2.x.x Suttapi.taka and paracanonical
3.x.x Abhidhammapi.taka
4.x.x.Later poetry (chronicles)
5.x.x Grammatical and lexicographical treatises
6.x.x Sanskrit Grammatical and lexicographical works
etc

As you can see, it roughly follows the standard divisions. What is
interesting is that commentarial literature is grouped under the main
text to which each item belongs.

1.1 Paatimokkha
1.1,1 Ka.mkhaavitara.nii
1.1,12 Vinayatthama´njuusaa
1.2 Vinayapitaka
1.2,1 Samantapaasaadikaa1.2,11 Vajirabuhhi.tiikaa

2.5.x Khuddakanikaaya

2.5.2 Dhammapada
2.5.2,1 Dhammapada.t.thakathaa
2.5.3 Udaana
2.5.3,1 Paramatthadiipanii
.
.
.
2.6 Milindapa´nha

5.1 Kaccaayanapakara.na
5.1,1 Kaccayanavutti
5.1,2 Kaccaayanasuttaniddesa
.
.
.
5.1,4 Mahaaruupasiddhi
5.1,41 Ruupasiddhi.tiikaa

There might be faults with this system. It might even have been
superceded. But since such a lot of work has been put into a
hierarchical classification scheme for the entire corpus of Pali
literature,it seems at least worth considering, before deciding on a
system.

best regards,

/Rett