FW: [osis-core] osisCore_Candiate_1.1_003 - 12 - splitID

[Todd Tillinghast]

This is the post form Thursday regarding splitIDs.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
[mailto:owner-osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org] On Behalf Of Todd
Tillinghast
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 12:34 PM
To: osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
Subject: [osis-core] osisCore_Candiate_1.1_003 - 12 - splitID

Patrick,

I have not gotten a chance to write about splitID.

Is there intention to indicate the sequence of the parts of a split
element?

Is the numeric value of the splitID used in the context of an osisID?

Why is splitID a positive number rather than a simple xs:string?
With a string a convention could be adopted to make it easier to create
only unique splitIDs.  But I am not sure if they are supposed to be
unique because I am not sure of the intended use.

(You must intend case 1 or case 2 with the current schema.)
Easy cases:
Case 1:
<div>
<p>
	<verse osisID="X" splitID="1"/>
</p>
<p>
	<verse osisID="X" splitID="1"/>
</p>
</div>

Case 2:
<div>
<p>
	<verse osisID="X" splitID=" 1"/>
</p>
<p>
	<verse osisID="X" splitID=" 2"/>
</p>
</div>


Case 3:
<div>
<p>
	<verse osisID="X" splitID="X.1"/>
</p>
<p>
	<verse osisID="X" splitID="X.2"/>
</p>
</div>

Case 4:
<div>
<p>
	<verse osisID="X" splitID="ABC.1"/>
</p>
<p>
	<verse osisID="X" splitID="ABC.2"/>
</p>
</div>


Hard case:
<div>
	<p>
		<verse osisID="X.1"/>
		<q splitID="2"/>
		<verse osisID="X.2"/>
		<verse osisID="X.3" splitID="1"/>
		</q>
	</p>
	<q splitID="2"/>
		<p>
			<verse osisID="X.1"/>
			<q splitID="3"/>
				<verse osisID="X.3" splitID="3"/>
				<verse osisID="X.4"/>
				<verse osisID="X.5" splitID="4"/>
			</q>
		</p>
		<p>
			<q splitID="3"/>
				<verse osisID="X.5" splitID="4"/>
			</q>
			<verse osisID="X.9" splitID="6"/>
		</p>
	<q splitID="2"/>
</div>
<div>
	<p>
		<q splitID="2"/>
			<verse osisID="X.9" splitID="6"/>
		</q>
		<verse osisID="X.9" splitID="6"/>
	</p>
	<p>
		<verse osisID="X.9" splitID="6"/>
		<verse osisID="X.10"/>
	</p>
</div>

This is sort of nasty example but is similar to Matt.13 or the TEV only
easier to read because I left out all of the other segmentation that
takes place due to the lineGroup/lines.

If the above what you have in mind?

I think it would be better to have:
A) A splitID that has a string value so that I would have used some
thing like splitID="Q-X.1-001" for the quote identifier, but DOES NOT
IMPLY ANY SORT OF ORDERING, with each element that is a part of the
split having the same splitID AND having NOTHING to do with the osisID.
OR 
B) (A) but also having a splitSeq value that is a positive integer that
specifies sequence.
C) Have a unique identifier that is the same for all of the element in
the split AND is independent of the osisID AND is postpended with a
value that indicates the sequence within the split.
D) Use the current splitID as positive integer which is independent of
the osisID and has not indication of sequence.
E) Use the current splitID as appositive integer with is dependant on
the osisID and NOT handle splits for elements that don't have an osisID.

I think options A and B are good options.

Thoughs?

Todd