MDH wrote:

Should defs contain multiple seg+bibl blocks? Yes and no. Some such bracketings already usefully exist (such as in the entry for háypx̣), and I've just tweaked the display to make them render more cleanly; on the other hand, creating such collapsed defs is interpretive and takes time, and is not a priority right now. So the existing ones will be left, but SK will not create more.

----------------------
Here is some more clarification for future reference:

-homophones are separate entries
-multiple <sense>s are only used with multiple <form>s
-all other definitions will appear in a <seg> within a <def>
-SMK will not collapse multiple defs from here on: only one <seg> per <def>.
-multiple <bibl>s on a single <seg> in a <def> means an identical English definition was given by more than one consultant

----------------------
On 2Dec11, ECH and SMK decided to continue with two levels of distinction, as described above.

In entries with multiple <seg>s per <def>, MDH can programmatically split the <seg>s out into separate <def>s again.

SMK had compiled lists of the multi-def and single-def/multi-seg examples currently in the database. There was clearly some method to the madness of using three levels of distinction thus far, but SMK identified entries which might need further adjustments if we ever want to go to three levels.