The titles of lexicographic tools – dictionary, lexicon or encyclopaedia – are normallyjust names given to them by the publishers, although you may point out certaindifferences between certain types. At least in the nordic countries the genuinepurpose of a dictionary normally is to be giving help by problems with existingtexts, the so-called communicative problems. A lexicon serves a narrow fieldwhereas an encyclopaedia serves as a tool for getting knowledge about all fields.Talking about quality in lexicographic works you may point out the lack of qualityin the sense of counting errors. But from a metalexicographic point of view the errorsare not important. More interesting are those definitions which are correct butnot sufficient. The thesis of our paper is that even if you assume a certain completeness,you cannot achieve quality without including a) the type of the potential user –being an expert, a semi-expert or a layman dealing with L1 or L2 – and b) the needswhich the reference work wants to fulfil – helping to solve problems in reception,text production, translation, or knowledge achievement. Examples from gene technologyand musicology will be given. Our own proposals are based on an Internetdictionary on musical terms, MUSIKORDBOGEN 2007, which has recently been madeaccessible
