[osis-core] When an osisID is not an osisID?

[Patrick Durusau]

Harry,

Did not mean to drop it in the email flurry this morning!

Harry Plantinga wrote:

>To answer my own question, my reading of this is that
>Matt.3.1 doesn't mean anything by itself -- it's short
>for something like Bible.KJV.Matt.3.1. 
>
>Thus, Bible.KJV.Ps.20 refers to a different psalm than
>Bible.LXX.Ps.20.  The question of correspondence between
>canonical reference schemes for different versions is
>not addressed by the reference/pointer syntax.
>
Actually there is an overlap in the syntax for osisID and osisRef which 
allows enough space for you to either:

1. Record Bible.KJV as work in the osisText element and documented as 
applying to all osisIDs in the document instance, or

2. Can use full osisIDs and specify on each one the Bible.KJV.Ps.20.

>
>If that's the case, i.e. if there's no canonical bible
>reference scheme, why not use a canonical CEV reference 
>scheme that has sections called "6b", "6b-11", or whatever 
>you please?  
>
My reluctance at any rate was due to the use of a range operator in the 
CEV reference scheme,  which is actually not a CEV reference scheme but 
an implied reference (in my opinion) to some unspecified reference 
system. (I suppose one could argue that the CEV has adopted a system 
that has varying reference forms, some Mark.1.1, others with the hyphen, 
but I don't find that very persuasive.)

Short answer is that no, we don't have a larger mapping mechanism 
(although the need is recognized) and at present, don't even have a way 
to map from an osisID in a document to another reference system, 
assuming you wanted to do  so. Perhaps osisRef? Might be better to have 
attribute(s) for parallel texts? Documented as being for the purpose of 
such a mapping?

Patrick



>
>-Harry
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
>>[mailto:owner-osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org]On Behalf Of Patrick
>>Durusau
>>Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2002 8:48 AM
>>To: osis-core
>>Subject: [osis-core] When an osisID is not an osisID?
>>
>>
>>Greetings,
>>
>>A brief diversion on one of the topics that Todd brought to my attention 
>>some time ago.
>>
>>If you look at the CEV translation of Matthew, you will note that about 
>>mid-way in the first paragraph, it has a reference to 2-6a and a little 
>>later, a paragraph begins with 6b-11.
>>
>>My suggestion to Todd was that this is not actually a referencing system 
>>in the CEV, but is in fact the use of a foreign reference system to 
>>allow someone using this text to map back to an inconsistent system from 
>>the one in the CEV.
>>
>> From my reading of the CEV, this system appears to follow no particular 
>>practice in terms of relating this references to actual structures in 
>>the text and operate as the print equivalent of milestones rather than 
>>as osisIDs on containers.
>>
>>Since I think we are likely to find any number of such translations 
>>(that don't have any container correspondence to traditional references) 
>>I would strongly suggest that we document that such references should be 
>>encoded as milestones using osisRef (coming in a little while) as 
>>opposed to osisID. Since osisRef will allow the specification of ranges 
>>and this is actually a reference to a reference system, that appears to 
>>make the most sense to me. (I am also not unmindful that it avoids all 
>>sorts of nasty crossing problems.)
>>
>>Proposal:
>>
>>For translations/texts  that do not follow a canonical reference system 
>>but that do refer to such systems to document particular places in the 
>>text, the structure of the text should be encoded but references to the 
>>external system, whether on an element or by milestone appearing in 
>>running text, should be using the osisRef attribute of type osisRef.
>>
>>Patrick
>>
>>-- 
>>Patrick Durusau
>>Director of Research and Development
>>Society of Biblical Literature
>>pdurusau@emory.edu
>>
>>

-- 
Patrick Durusau
Director of Research and Development
Society of Biblical Literature
pdurusau@emory.edu