[osis-core] scripCom

[Harry Plantinga]

One drawback with using <verse> to identify
commentary on a verse is what happens when you have
both verses and commentary in the same document?

I'd rather have a way of saying "I'm a commentary on
verse xxx", or "I'm a sermon on passage xxx", or "I'm
a versification of psalm xxx", etc.

-Harry

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
> [mailto:owner-osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org]On Behalf Of Troy A.
> Griffitts
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 3:31 PM
> To: osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
> Subject: Re: [osis-core] scripCom
> 
> 
> > That seems reasonable; what are the types that you know of?
> > 
> > So far we've distinguished
> > 
> > a) Identifying a part of the document as 'being' a certain passage
> > 
> > b) a cross-reference to a given passage
> 
> I think we need to decide (if we haven't yet), that <verse> is always: I 
> am this, and <reference> is always cf. some verse (or other container 
> based on our elaborate schemes of stuff like mat.1.1+char(5), mat.1.1, 
> mat.1, mat)
> 
> Is it clear that we are not reserving these "I'm this" / "cf. That" 
> elements for Bibles.  Do we-- and have we stated clearly that we-- 
> intend for them to be used in other contexts besides Scripture?
> 
> 
> > It seems we need to add at least
> > 
> > c) being commentary about a given passage
> 
> The reason I bring this up, is that we exported, e.g. Matthew Henry's 
> verse by verse commentary just like a Bible, marking "I'm this" with 
> <verse> tags.
> 
> Not sure if I like this or not, but I *do* like the idea of have the 
> *same* elements for both a) and b) that Steve mentioned above.  It 
> leaves one place to write code against for such operations.
> 
> So, is there a clear distinction for a 3rd, c), type?  Or might our "I'm 
> this" tag be used with a specific type for all kinds of documents:
> 
> <verse verseID="markup language">
> Main Entry: markup language
> Function: noun
> Date: 1980
> : a system (as HTML or SGML) for marking or tagging a document that 
> indicates its logical structure (as paragraphs) and gives instructions 
> for its layout on the page for electronic transmission and display
> </verse>
> 
> 
> Does that seem strange?  Calling it verse seems a little strange to me.
> Did we decide that it's ok to allow spaces in verseID?
> 
>