[osis-core] Paragraph/verse containers
Troy A. Griffitts
osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
Wed, 05 Nov 2003 00:29:45 -0700
Todd,
I understand exactly what was decided in TX for rules about p and verse
being split, and we are in agreement as to what was decided.
Please notice the preface to my final statement (to quote myself again):
Just to sum up my perfect world: I would love for all Bibles to mark
paragraph containers. Even if they did, I would still choose to use
verse containers and use milestones to mark paragraphs.
I don't like the decision made to force verse milestones. I would
almost rather not encode <p> if it forces me to use milestones on bcv,
but I will when encoding OSIS because that was what was decided. But in
MY SOFTWARE (please pay attention to the details of my posts) I
currently plan to always use verse containers. I currently do not have
the data to properly encode <p> in the NASB. I hope I answered all of
your questions.
-Troy.
Todd Tillinghast wrote:
> Troy, Chris, and Patrick,
>
> At the meeting in TX where we did away with the "split" attribute, a
> part of the conclusion was that when section and paragraph structures
> where present that _best practice_ REQUIRES that the book/chapter/verse
> hierarchy be encoded as milestones.
>
> The driving reasoning behind the above decision was that if we _allowed_
> multiple mechanisms/encoding styles that software would have to support
> both.
>
> The reason that I encoded the CEV with <verse> milestones is because
> _best practice_ dictates it, given the structures present in the CEV.
>
> To set the record straight, I AM NOT focused on rendering entire Bibles
> and AM more focused on letting the user interact with scripture AND will
> likely see the most common access _use case_ be based on references
> (verse containers) rather than by paragraph and section containers.
>
> I CAN believe that the NASB does not have any cases where a verse
> overlaps a paragraph, but I am a little bit surprised. IF this is true,
> then I continue to suggest that it is more of the exception than the
> rule.
>
> I don't believe that we established best practice for quotes but I
> suspect that we will agree (rare as that might be) that quotes should be
> encoded as milestones when they over lap other hierarchies, either BCV
> or BSP.
>
> It is certainly possible to encode an OSIS document that does not
> conform to _best practice_, but it should not be included in the user's
> manual. (Both BCV and BSP are _best practice_.)
>
> Possibly where Troy and I are coming from different angles, is that I
> believe that an _authoritative_ OSIS encoding of each translation should
> be encoded by the copyright holder. For cases where there is no
> copyright holder because the text is in the public domain, I would hope
> that groups like Crosswire, the SBL, and possibly a couple of other
> similar organizations would encode those texts and offer _authoritative_
> encodings.
>
> Troy, do you see multiple parties encoding the same text for different
> purposes and thus varying amounts of detail in the encoding and
> differing hierarchies?
>
> Do we have differing understandings/awareness' of the decision in TX
> that _best practice_ requires that when sections and paragraphs are
> present and they overlap the BSP hierarchy that the chapter and/or verse
> elements MUST be encoded as milestones?
>
> Todd
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: osis-core-admin@bibletechnologieswg.org [mailto:osis-core-
>>admin@bibletechnologieswg.org] On Behalf Of Troy A. Griffitts
>>Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 7:49 AM
>>To: osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
>>Subject: Re: [osis-core] Paragraph/verse containers
>>
>>Patrick,
>> Thanks for your comment from France! You should be out enjoying
>
> the
>
>>surrounding!
>>
>> I think the real focus is NOT contemporary translation methods.
>
> I
>
>>just
>>finished encoding the NASB and used verse containers.
>>
>>
>> THE REAL DIFFERENCE IMO is the _USE_ of the encoded document. I
>>WILL
>>ALWAYS use verse containers internally in my software and BREAK
>>PARAGRAPHS, as it stands right now.
>>
>> The reasons:
>>
>> 1) Todd is focused on rendering entire Bibles.
>> 2) I am focused on letting a user interact Scripture.
>>
>>In my world users give me verse containers like John.1.1 or
>>John.1.1-John.1.9. I have to go retrieve these containers.
>
> Everything
>
>>is centered around these containers.
>>
>>Now, as Steve and others have pointed out, there are VERY VALUABLE
>>applications of paragraph CONTAINERS for DIGITAL textual content
>>analysis, but most of my users do ANALOG textual content analysis :)
>>Nonetheless. I hope to add more 'paragraph' centric search abilities
>>and the like. But 99% of my processing is done on verse containers,
>
> and
>
>>even if that changes to 90% in the future, I will still remain verse
>>container-centric.
>>
>>
>>Just to sum up my perfect world: I would love for all Bibles to mark
>>paragraph containers. Even if they did, I would still choose to use
>>verse containers and use milestones to mark paragraphs.
>>
>> -Troy.
>>
>>
>>
>>Patrick Durusau wrote:
>>
>>>Chris,
>>>
>>>Todd can answer for himself but from my conversations with him I
>
> suspect
>
>>>that he thinks that the KJV is an anomaly in terms of modern
>
> translation
>
>>> practices which tends to favor structures that cross verse
>
> boundaries.
>
>>>Whatever the merits of modern translation practice, there are a lot
>
> of
>
>>>historical texts that do not follow that practice.
>>>
>>>Since I was using his text as a sample, I was simply following what
>
> he
>
>>>had entered. We now have a couple of more weeks on the users manual
>
> and
>
>>>I will have time to "cook" the examples to be more focused than
>
> looked
>
>>>like I would have time to do with the original schedule.
>>>
>>>Should have copious notes that direct a user to more advanced
>
> treatment
>
>>>of some issues, like verse boundaries. I really dislike works that
>
> force
>
>>>the reader to hunt for material relevant to their problems. Perhaps,
>
> not
>
>>>in the first beta release, we need to have indexes something like:
>
> Guide
>
>>>for Encoding Modern Translations, Guide to Encoding Classic
>
> Translation
>
>>>and the like, being pointers to the relevant materials on each one,
>>>perhaps not in the same order as presented in the manual.
>>>
>>>Thoughts?
>>>
>>>Hope you are having a great day!
>>>
>>>Patrick
>>>
>>>Chris Little wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Todd,
>>>>
>>>>It sounds like you're advocating using milestones everywhere all of
>>>>the time, at least for <verse>. If that were our desire, why would
>
> we
>
>>>>have included <verse> as a container at all?
>>>>
>>>>The KJV is every bit as complex as any other Bible in terms of its
>>>>needing milestones to mark structures such as quotations, which
>
> will
>
>>>>cross verse boundaries. But the real issue here is to make the
>>>>example as simple as humanly possible. To that end, I think it
>
> should
>
>>>>be limited to containers. From that point, the manual can build
>
> more
>
>>>>complicated structures and detail to the user why to use milestones
>>>>instead of containers in certain circumstances, etc.
>>>>
>>>>--Chris
>>>>
>>>>Todd Tillinghast wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Chris and Patrick,
>>>>>
>>>>>I think we would be doing a disservice to the newbies if we were
>
> to
>
>>take
>>
>>>>>out the milestones. Better to start them off right and not have
>
> to
>
>>>>>relearn later. Most real Bible's other than the KJV will require
>
> the
>
>>>>>use of milestones?
>>>>>
>>>>>Let's show them a real but simple example.
>>>>>
>>>>>Todd
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>From: osis-core-admin@bibletechnologieswg.org [mailto:osis-core-
>>>>>>admin@bibletechnologieswg.org] On Behalf Of Chris Little
>>>>>>Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 12:17 PM
>>>>>>To: osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
>>>>>>Subject: Re: [osis-core] Esth. corrected
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Patrick,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Why not just use container markup for the <verse>'s instead of
>
> the
>
>>>>>>milestones (to avoid scaring the newbies). I'd also recommend
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>stripping
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>out anything that uses the attribute extension mechanism
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>(x-copyright).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>If we're giving it in our "minimal" example, it implies we
>
> omitted
>
>>>>>>something very basic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--Chris
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Patrick Durusau wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>osis-core mailing list
>>>>osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
>>>>http://www.bibletechnologieswg.org/mailman/listinfo/osis-core
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>osis-core mailing list
>>osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
>>http://www.bibletechnologieswg.org/mailman/listinfo/osis-core
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osis-core mailing list
> osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
> http://www.bibletechnologieswg.org/mailman/listinfo/osis-core