[osis-core] RE: [Fwd: [osis-editors] Examples]

[Todd Tillinghast]

Patrick and Jim,

See below.

Todd

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Durusau [mailto:Patrick.Durusau@sbl-site.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 11:30 AM
> To: Todd Tillinghast
> Subject: [Fwd: [osis-editors] Examples]
> 
> Todd,
> 
> Just in case you have not seen Jim's comments on Esth.
> 
> Can you respond and copy the list?
> 
> Hope you are having a great day!
> 
> Patrick
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [osis-editors] Examples
> Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 23:57:45 -0800
> From: "Jim Schaad" <jimsch@nwlink.com>
> Reply-To: osis-editors@bibletechnologieswg.org
> To: <osis-editors@bibletechnologieswg.org>
> 
> Looking at the example Bible.en.cev.1992.Esth.xml I note the following
> issues:
> 
> 1.  The document is only available as a PDF file.  This is a pain in
the
> butt in order to get it back to an XML file.
> 

To the left of the PDF links is link to the XML texts themselves.

The PDF versions are provided so that people who have browsers to old to
display XML or don't have an XML editor can see the markup.  (Personally
this seems like an unlikely profile for a person wanting to read the raw
XML.)

What is most unfortunate is that these sample texts are VERY OLD.  I
created updated versions and have sent them to the appropriate party
twice.
(I assume you are talking about the text available at
http://www.bibletechnologies.net/osistext/absosistexts.dsp.)

 
> 2.  The document does not meet Level 1 for the following reasons:

I am not sure where you are getting your definition of Level 1
compliance.  Please let me know so I can provide some feedback and
hopefully correct the misinformation (from my perspective anyway and if
there are different views we need to make a clear statement).
> 
> 	a.  The creator  item is missing

creator is not required for any Level of compliance to my understanding.

> 	b.  The dates item is missing
date is not required for any Level of compliance to my understanding.
> 	c.  No revision element exists.
revision is not required for any Level of compliance to my
understanding.  And if there has been no revision would this make sense?
> 	d.  The second work item is lacking title, create and revision
> elements.

This intentional due to the "matching rules" for works used when
applying a reference.  A reference using this terse <work> is a
reference to any OSIS document with exact matches for ALL of the
elements (except <scope> and one other that escapes me now) in the
referring <work> element.  With OSIS 2.0 this becomes even more
effective with the additional meaning assigned to <identifier
type="OSIS">.

> 	e.  Contributor role="encoder".  This is not in the Appendix G
> list.  I just looked through the list and this appears to me an item
not
> in the list.

The documentation just needs to be updated, it is in the schema and the
intent is clear.

> 	f.  It is missing some quote elements.
> 		Esth.4.13, Esth.4.16, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5,....

I would have to take a look at the document.  This is likely an error.
I would like to look at the OSIS 2.0 version and get it posted rather
than posting a corrected OSIS 1.5 document.

> 
> 
> 3.  RefSystem appears to be totally lacking from the 2.0.1 user's
> manual.

If it is not there, it should be there.

> 
> Jim
> 
> _______________________________________________
> osis-editors mailing list
> osis-editors@bibletechnologieswg.org
> http://www.bibletechnologieswg.org/mailman/listinfo/osis-editors
> 
> 
> --
> Patrick Durusau
> Director of Research and Development
> Society of Biblical Literature
> Patrick.Durusau@sbl-site.org
> Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
> Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model
> 
> Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!