[osis-core] quotes

Patrick Durusau osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
Mon, 21 Oct 2002 17:13:18 -0400


Troy,

No reply yet but did not want you to think I was ignoring the issue! 
Covered up with all sorts of stuff. Printing it out so I can read it 
during dinner.

Will try to have a response or at least some semblance of a reply by 
NOON (East Coast time) tomorrow.

Sorry 'bout that!

Patrick

Troy A. Griffitts wrote:

>> Question:  Are there known cases in printed versions where the same
>> translation is rendered differently?
>
>
> Good question.  It would definitely tell us if one publisher felt it 
> was their right to add continuation quotes to a book.
>
> I still find it hard to believe if a Tozer or Lewis submitted a work 
> to be printed, that the publisher would find it their duty to add 
> continuation quotes to the work.  An editor maybe, and probably 
> approved by the author.
>
>
>> After encoding a few things, I am of the mind to recommend using 
>> milestones
>> for ALL quotes other than short/simple quotes.  As a result I would be
>> infavor of adding back in a special milestone specifically for quotes.
>> Thoughts?
>
>
> I'm pretty much with you on this one.  I still like our proposal to 
> allow a few legal empty tags to act as milestones.  Last incarnation:
>
> <q mStart="uniqueID1" />stuff<q mEnd="uniqueID1" />
>
> <q> seems to be an easy exception to the objection of special parsing 
> for these.  A dumb XSL could merely replace all <q> tags with "  (or 
> consider the 'level' attribute to determine a more proper character).
>
> I don't know where we stand regarding the ability to augment the 
> specification in our current chronology.
>
> Any ideas, gents?
>
>     -Troy.
>
>
>
>>
>> A little more below.
>>
>> Todd
>>
>>> I'm impressed with your encoding, BUT....
>>>
>>> For this example, I would still rather use milestones.  And for the 
>>> code
>>> I'm writing that tries to turn "'` into <q> tags, I'm tempted to ALWAYS
>>> use milestones, so as not to worry about crossing other boundaries.
>>>
>>> Regarding my real immediate question though... I explicitly stated 
>>> in my
>>> first email (because I KNEW YOU SPECIFICALLY would recommend
>>> segmentation :) ) that I didn't think segmentation was a good 
>>> mechanism,
>>> and I tried to state a very easily confused concept that SHOULD BE
>>> DRASTICALLY kept separate-- in my mind, at least.  To quote:
>>>
>>>
>>> >>1) Segmentation should not be the suggested mechanism do this.
>>> >>Segmentation is for CODING PROBLEMS of hierarchy and constitute ONE
>>> >>LOGICAL element, when reconstructed programmatically.  This is a very
>>> >>different thing than actual content segmentation symbols intended for
>>> >>the reader.
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree that the splitID should NOT be encoded for this purpose of
>> identifiying paragraphs.  Only because it is consistently there for 
>> other
>> reasons do I suggest it be used to identify quotes that are split across
>> multiple paragraphs.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> concept 1) OSIS <q> with attribute: splitID.  This has absolutely NO
>>> bearing on presentation/text meaning, and is ONLY used because of XML
>>> limitations on hierarchy.  We can attach NO OTHER MEANING TO THIS, 
>>> in my
>>> opinion-- and this is very important.
>>>
>>> It's the same problem some of the SIL guys had on first glance with
>>> another scenario: "Hello", said Troy, "how are you?"  They wanted to
>>> know if this quote should be the same quote and use splitID.  THE
>>> DEFINITIVE ANSWER is NO.  splitID segmentation explicates NO meaning to
>>> the text; it is only a coding mechanism (and possibly temporary, at
>>> that) to alleviate XML hierarchy problems.
>>>
>>> concept 2) a quote in the English language can be segmented.
>>>
>>>
>>> Other than having the semantic english word 'segmented' in common, 
>>> these
>>> 2 concepts should have NOTHING to do with each other-- and are easily
>>> confused, and easily bled together.
>>>
>>>
>>> Now, back to your email.  As stated, for the most part, I like your
>>> encoding of the Jeremiah text, except that I will probably not mix
>>> hierarchy sub-elements when I'm working on generating these tags
>>> programmatically.  e.g.  I won't have <verse><p></p></verse> in one
>>> place, and have <p><verse></verse></p> in another.  My code won't be
>>> smart enough to figure out what's better.
>>>
>>> BUT and FINALLY, I still think it's necessary to give an AUTHOR the
>>> ability of stating that he wants to use quote continuation mark at a
>>> certain location.
>>>
>>> There is a fine line here, but I tend to think this is an _authorative_
>>> style, and not just a _publishing_ style.
>>>
>>> Just my opinion.  I'm interested to hear your rebuttals and others'
>>> thoughts.
>>>
>>>
>>>     -Troy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Todd Tillinghast wrote:
>>>
>>>> Troy,
>>>>
>>>> I think that what is encoded should strictly be where the quote starts
>>>> and ends.  This can be accomplished either with a milestone or with a
>>>> <q> element.  If a <q> element is used then either the <q> element OR
>>>> the other overlapping elements would be segmented.  The fact that a
>>>> quote mark is placed at the first of a paragraph that continues a 
>>>> quote
>>>> from a prior paragraph is a presentation issue and different styles 
>>>> will
>>>> handle this differently.
>>>>
>>>> I picked out Bible.TEV:Matt.13 for test encoding for the reasons you
>>>> have run into.
>>>>
>>>> If you go with segmentation, I personally think that it is more 
>>>> natural
>>>> to segment the <q> element rather than the <p> and possibly other
>>>> elements.
>>>>
>>>> The benefit of segmenting the <q> element is that the presence of a
>>>> "splitID" attribute indicates that the quote has been split, which 
>>>> makes
>>>> the job of rendering a quote mark at the start of a paragraph that
>>>> continues a quote fairly simple.
>>>>
>>>> This is how I would encode it:
>>>> <div>
>>>>     <p>
>>>>         <verse osisID="Jer.2.1">Moreover the word of the LORD
>>>> came to me, saying,</verse>
>>>>         <verse osisID="Jer.2.2">
>>>>             <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-A">Go and cry in the
>>>> hearing of Jerusalem, saying, <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-B">Thus says the
>>>> LORD:<q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-C">I remember you, The kindness of your
>>>> youth, The love of your betrothal, When you went after Me in the
>>>> wilderness, In a land not sown. </q>
>>>>                 </q>
>>>>             </q>
>>>>         </verse>
>>>>         <verse osisID="Jer.2.3">
>>>>             <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-A">
>>>>                 <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-B">
>>>>                     <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-C">Israel
>>>> [was] holiness to the LORD, The firstfruits of His increase.  All that
>>>> devour him will offend; Disaster will come upon them,</q>
>>>>                     <!--True Close Q-Jer.2.2-C
>>>> -->says the LORD.</q>
>>>>                 <!-- True Close Q-Jer.2.2-B -->
>>>>             </q>
>>>>             <!--NO True Close Q-Jer.2.2-A -->
>>>>         </verse>
>>>>     </p>
>>>>     <p>
>>>>         <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-A">
>>>>             <verse osisID="Jer.2.4">Hear the word of the
>>>> LORD, O house of Jacob and all the families of the house of
>>>> Israel.</verse>
>>>>             <verse osisID="Jer.2.5">Thus says the LORD:<q
>>>> splitID="Q-Jer.2.5-A">What injustice have your fathers found in Me, 
>>>> That
>>>> they have gone far from Me, Have followed idols, And have become
>>>> idolaters?</q>
>>>>             </verse>
>>>>             <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.5-A">
>>>>                 <verse osisID="Jer.2.6">Neither did they
>>>> say,<q>
>>>>                         <!-- No need for a split
>>>> here --> Where [is] the LORD, Who brought us up out of the land of
>>>> Egypt, Who led us through the wilderness, Through a land of deserts 
>>>> and
>>>> pits, Through a land of drought and the shadow of death, Through a 
>>>> land
>>>> that no one crossed And where no one dwelt?</q>
>>>>                 </verse>
>>>>                 <verse osisID="Jer.2.7">I brought you
>>>> into a bountiful country, To eat its fruit and its goodness. But when
>>>> you entered, you defiled My land And made My heritage an
>>>> abomination.</verse>
>>>>                 <verse osisID="Jer.2.8">The priests did
>>>> not say,<q>Where [is] the LORD?</q>And those who handle the law did 
>>>> not
>>>> know Me; The rulers also transgressed against Me; The prophets
>>>> prophesied by Baal, And walked after [things that] do not
>>>> profit.</verse>
>>>>                 <verse osisID="Jer.2.9">
>>>>                     <!--****conflict here**** no
>>>> ending "-->
>>>>                 </verse>
>>>>             </q>
>>>>             <!-- True Close of Q-Jer.2.5-A -->
>>>>         </q>
>>>>         <!-- True Close of Q-Jer.2.2-A -->
>>>>     </p>
>>>> </div>
>>>> Not sure if I got the part near Jer.2.9 right since that is where you
>>>> left off and I don't have a printed NKJV.  Hopefully you get the idea.
>>>>
>>>> Also note that I started the split quote "Q-Jer.2.5-A" inside the
>>>> <verse> element Jer.2.5 but then had the continuation of the <q> 
>>>> element
>>>> "Q-Jer.2.5-A" contain the <verse> elements for Jer.2.6, Jer.2.7, 
>>>> Jer.2.8
>>>> and Jer.2.9.  This leaves "Q-Jer.2.5-A" split into only two pieces but
>>>> also has it contained within and containing <verse> elements that are
>>>> parallel.
>>>>
>>>> The placement of the continuation quote mark when rendering would be
>>>> identified by a <q> that is split prior to the first "text" in the
>>>> paragraph.
>>>>
>>>> The other option is to use milestones.  I am not really opposed to 
>>>> using
>>>> milestones for quotes, especially for cases like this.  But I don't
>>>> think there is any need for <q type="continuation"> since there will
>>>> MUST already be the information provided by "splitID" attributes.
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Todd
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hey guys.  Got some quote questions for you all.  Again, I go to
>>>>> extremely difficult problems in the minor prophets.  Please see after
>>>>> example for my immediate question.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's an excerpt from the NKJV, Jer 2:1-.  I've tried to 'codify' 
>>>>> the
>>>>> quotes and indentation to help see the hierarchy:
>>>>>
>>>>> _________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying,  2.
>>>>> "
>>>>>  Go and cry in the hearing of Jerusalem, saying,
>>>>>  '
>>>>>    Thus says the LORD:
>>>>>    "
>>>>>      I remember you, The kindness of your youth, The love of your
>>>>>      betrothal, When you went after Me in the wilderness, In a
>>>>>      land not sown.  3. Israel [was] holiness to the LORD, The
>>>>>      firstfruits of His increase.  All that devour him will
>>>>>      offend; Disaster will come upon them,
>>>>>    "
>>>>>    says the LORD.
>>>>>  '
>>>>> "
>>>>> 4. Hear the word of the LORD, O house of Jacob and all the
>>>>> families of the house of Israel.  5. Thus says the LORD:
>>>>> "
>>>>>  What injustice have your fathers found in Me, That they have gone
>>>>>  far from Me, Have followed idols, And have become idolaters?
>>>>>  6. Neither did they say,
>>>>>  '
>>>>>    Where [is] the LORD, Who brought us up out of the land of Egypt,
>>>>>    Who led us through the wilderness, Through a land of deserts
>>>>>    and pits, Through a land of drought and the shadow of death,
>>>>>    Through a land that no one crossed And where no one dwelt?
>>>>>  '
>>>>>  7. I brought you into a bountiful country, To eat its fruit
>>>>>  and its goodness. But when you entered, you defiled My land
>>>>>  And made My heritage an abomination.  8. The priests did not say,
>>>>>  '
>>>>>    Where [is] the LORD?
>>>>>  '
>>>>>  And those who handle the law did not know Me; The rulers
>>>>>  also transgressed against Me; The prophets prophesied
>>>>>  by Baal, And walked after [things that] do not profit.
>>>>>  9.
>>>>> <****conflict here**** no ending ">
>>>>> "
>>>>>  Therefore I will yet bring charges against you,
>>>>> "
>>>>> says the LORD,...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> Verse 9 has a 'continuation quote' that started in verse 5.  I think
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> NKJV does this when a new paragraph begins and the quote spans the
>>>>> paragraph, eg.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a long quote, "Hello this is my first paragraph.
>>>>> "This is my second paragraph."
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is another example from John 7:21:
>>>>> _________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> 21. Jesus answered and said to them, "I did one work, and you all
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> marvel.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 22. "Moses therefore gave you circumcision (not that it is from 
>>>>> Moses,
>>>>> but from the fathers), and you circumcise a man on the Sabbath.
>>>>> 23. "If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the 
>>>>> law of
>>>>> Moses should not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made a 
>>>>> man
>>>>> completely well on the Sabbath?
>>>>> 24. "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous
>>>>> judgment."
>>>>> _________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> the quote starts in 21, and continues thru 24.  There are
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 'continuation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> quotes' starting verses 22, 23, and 24.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> HOW IN THE WORLD SHOULD WE MARK THESE UP?
>>>>>
>>>>> My thoughts:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Segmentation should not be the suggested mechanism do this.
>>>>> Segmentation is for CODING PROBLEMS of hierarchy and constitute ONE
>>>>> LOGICAL element, when reconstructed programmatically.  This is a very
>>>>> different thing that actual content segmentation symbols intended for
>>>>> the reader.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) suggestion: <q type="continuation" />
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) alternate suggestion: no markup at all.  Just remove the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> continuation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> quotes and let the renderer decide that it needs to insert the
>>>>> appropriate "'` or whatever/whenever the renderer feels the need to
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> show
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> continuation quotes.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think enabling authors to mark these up in text is best, so I 
>>>>> prefer
>>>>> something like the suggestion in 2.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>         -Troy.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>

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