[osis-core] osisRef (finally)

[Harry Plantinga]

> I would like to hear some discussion about the:
>
> "Bible.KJV"
>
> text.  What exactly do people (you people) mean when they say this?
>
> 'Bible' as opposed to???  Commentary? Lexicon? DailyDevotional?  Are we
> really wanting to classify works other than Bibles at this level?
>
> 'KJV' meaning versification scheme? Actual work? If so, what edition?

It seems to me that we need

  1. A way of "registering" a set of osisIDs for a work identifier like
     "Bible.KJV". This could be done by declaring a certain document to
     embody/exemplify the standard.

     I.e. say that "Bible.KJV" must use osisIDs in the way that they are
     used in http://bibletechnologies.org/osisID/bible.kjv.xml

  2. A way of "registering" a transformation between two different schemes.
     E.g. saying that the transformation from Bible.KJV to Bible.LXX is
     defined in http://bibletechnologies.org/osisID/bible.kjv-bible.lxx.xml.
     Perhaps that doc would have osisIDs for bible.kjv and osisRefs for
     bible.lxx. You'd have a separate bible.lxx-bible.kjv.xml.

     Note that if you have say 100 versions of bibles, you wouldn't want
     to have all pairwise transformations. That would be about 20,000
     transformations. More likely, you'd have a transformation for every
     version into and out of a reference version that has all possible
     books, e.g. NRSVA.

  3. Maybe a generic class of schemes like "bible" could be defined as long
     as it was possible to convert between any pair of particular schemes
     in the class, e.g. Bible.LXX and Bible.KJV.  So, you're only allowed to
     use the "bible" prefix in your work identifier if you've got a
translation
     to/from a reference document for the Bible class, such as NRSVA.
Perhaps
     the osisID reference for the class would be
     http://bibletechnologies.org/osisID/bible.xml.

-Harry