[osis-core] Outstaning Comments/Concerns?

[Patrick Durusau]

Harry,

Thanks for the reminders! I wrote in some haste and was hopeful of 
responses such as yours!

Harry Plantinga wrote:

>Patrick,
>
>You mention 
>
>  1. simple hypertext links
>

See my latest proposal.

>
>  2. make the segID optional on <seg> so it can be used as a
>     generic phrase-level container
>
OK, can do that.

>
>
>I brought up some other issues that would need to be handled for use
>with with digital libraries, bible software, etc. 
>
>  3. <index type="" title="" subject1="" subject2="">
>
Can you expand a little on this one? Do you mean it as something akin to 
<seg> but that operates as an index? Suggested content/container model?

>
>  4. identify a div as a commentary on a bible passage
>
By this I assume you mean an attribute other than our pointer syntax? In 
other words, a reference that is not strictly a pointer, for example:

<div commentary="Gen.1-10, Exodus.1-5> such that it refers but does not 
point?

>
>  5. identifying a part of a document as terms and definitions/dictionary
>     entries/etc.
>
Hmmm, <list> with <label> and <item> are not sufficient? (Real question 
because that is how I would do terms or a simple glossary. Dictionary 
entries, in the sense of real dictionaries,  are much more complex than 
could be handled with <list>.)

>
>One major issue that I haven't heard discussed and that isn't mentioned
>in the OSIS requirements specification is the _purpose_ of the markup.
>Are we marking texts for literary analysis, or for bible software, or
>for electronic bookreaders, or for conversion to multiple formats with
>nice layout? 
>
>If you say "all of these," then issues like 3-5 have to be dealt
>with before OSIS will really be well-defined for bible-software-like 
>applications. Otherwise different groups will use different conventions 
>and hacks. If you want to try to make OSIS work well for bible software, 
>let me know, and we can try to think of any additional issues. 
>
Want all of the above and to work well with bible software.

Recall, however, that this is basic markup, not the full set required by 
publishers, scholars or translators. Think of it as the underlying basis 
for a fuller feature set to be defined on top of it. (The reasoning 
behind this modular approach was that I have been involved in several 
attempts to define scholarly markup (the last 5%) that had not addressed 
the beginning 95%. Hopeful that we can build a solid base for fuller 
markup, but a base that will be useful for routine markup.)

Full literary markup, for example, is something that I would see as 
being added to the base OSIS schema.

Thanks!

Patrick

>
>If you don't want to deal with issues like 3-5 right now, that's OK
>with me; I'll probably keep using ThML for my needs anyway, with conversion
>to OSIS. I suppose that the crosswire people will come up with additional, 
>de-facto guidelines and practices for their own purposes if they aren't 
>all there in OSIS 1.1.
>
>-Harry
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
>>[mailto:owner-osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org]On Behalf Of Patrick
>>Durusau
>>Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 7:56 AM
>>To: osis-core
>>Subject: [osis-core] Outstaning Comments/Concerns?
>>
>>
>>Greetings,
>>
>>Other than the outstanding questions voiced by Harry last Friday (simple 
>>links and emph problems) are there any other major items on the table? 
>>(I realize that Troy has deferred to some degree his concern on overlaps 
>>to OSIS 2.0. It is also one of my major research interests so I will be 
>>working on it in the meantime as well.)
>>
>>I will be spending most of the day on house-keeping sorts of things, 
>>removing the various revision comments, moving comments on best 
>>practices to annotation elements in the schema, etc.,  so please forward 
>>anything that you thing we need to include.
>>
>>Will try to issue a version by late afternoon or early evening that 
>>reflects what I view as our current consensus (this may not in fact be 
>>our current consensus so do not be offended but politely point out where 
>>I have fallen short. If you disagree with it, it is clear that I have 
>>not accurately reported our consensus. That is error on my part, to fail 
>>to speak up is error on yours. ;-)
>>
>>Thanks!
>>
>>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