[osis-core] [osis-user] Re: semantics of <divineName>?

[DM Smith]

In response to this whole thread:
There is a need to have a tag, perhaps distinguished via an  
attribute, which can unambiguously be rendered as small caps for the  
very purpose of continuing the tradition of rendering YHWH as Lord.

YHWH is also used as a compound name, e.g. Jehovah Jirah, Jehovah  
Nissi .... I think that these single words may need to have an  
appropriate level of tagging as a divine name and not simply a name  
of God. There should be a mention on how these are to be handled.

I think that there is a scholarly value in tagging all the names of  
God as distinct from names of god or people. It would serve for  
research purposes. This purpose is distinct and different from the  
rendering tradition of YHWH as Lord. As Chris noted, we can come up  
with a fairly exhaustive list of the various scriptural names of God.  
While this would be a fairly large list, it is better than having x-  
renditions that are non-standard. I would suggest adding it if  
someone were to exhaustively catalog the names and apply them to a  
particular OSIS Bible (i.e. perhaps suggest a mechanism and pattern,  
having the first implementation become the standard set of attributes.)

On Jun 18, 2006, at 12:55 AM, Troy A. Griffitts wrote:

> Patrick,
> 	I'm sorry to disagree again with you.  I like you... Really... :)
>
> 	I'm not looking for how to make our chosen name apply most  
> logically for someone not familiar with marking Bibles.  If I were,  
> I would whole-heartedly agree with your proposal.
>
> 	My desire, years ago when proposing this tag, was specifically to  
> handle the existing anomaly in practically all literal translations  
> of the Bible.  We all talked about the best name for this anomaly,  
> and <divineName> was chosen.  Using this tag for any other  
> reference to God, like El-Shaddai, or for any other pseudo-divine  
> entity like Allah, Baal, Asher, or any other usage, would not be  
> for what this tag is designed.
>
> 	Now, to address the logic of the currently selected tag name...
>
> 	YHWH IS THE DIVINE PROPER NAME THE ONE TRUE GOD HAS CHOSEN FOR  
> HIMSELF.  There is no ambiguity.  Any other reference to God is  
> like calling Patrick Durusau, The Master of All Things "Topic  
> Maps".  Though naturally everyone will truly understand this as a  
> reference to Patrick Durusau, no one would ever consider this your  
> proper name.  Just the same, YHWH is God's proper name.
>
> 	Again, back to the issue of OSIS...  Scriptural markup, as it  
> exists today in typeset Bibles, requires only a few core tags to  
> represent. One of these core tags is <divineName>, is a very  
> specific anomaly (detailed in my last email), and needs a very  
> intentional, unambiguous tag for this purpose.
>
> 	It's not just any 'Divine Name', it is very specifically: YHWH in  
> the Hebrew, purposely modified to something other than YHWH in a  
> translation.
>
> 	-Troy.
>
>
>
>
> Patrick Durusau wrote:
>> Steve,
>> Steven J. DeRose wrote:
>>> I believe Troy is right on this. I recall some long discussions  
>>> about the scope of <divineName>, and I think in the end we did  
>>> settle on it being used only for the tetragrammaton. At one point  
>>> we talked about having types on personal names to take care of  
>>> the rest, but I forget what we decided on that. I kind of like  
>>> the idea of having a separate tag for non-tetra references to  
>>> God, but I remember losing that one.... :)
>>>
>> Several problems:
>> 1. Incorrect/inconsistent usage: Note that several years after the  
>> discussion when I was writing the users manual, I assumed the  
>> divineName was just that, divineName. Not a shorthand for a single  
>> typographical tradition for one word in the text. Even if the  
>> manual is corrected, how many others are going to make that  
>> mistake? Noting that it is not possible to test for that mistake  
>> given the number of languages into which the Bible is being  
>> translated.
>> 2. What else will users think to use with El Shaddai, etc.?  
>> <name>? With inconsistent x- attributes?
>> 3. Loss of ability to search for all divine names including the  
>> tetragrammaton. With Chris's proposal, slightly modified, we could  
>> do that as well as preserve the usage that Troy is contending for.
>> What if tetragrammaton is the default value for type on  
>> divineName? And we insert the list of other divine names?
>> No loss for Troy's use case and it enables other users to use what  
>> is the natural element for other divine names and to do so  
>> consistently.
>> That seems like a net win to me.
>> Hope you are having a great day!
>> Patrick
>>> S
>
>
>
> -- 
> To unsubscribe send an email with subject unsubscribe to osis- 
> user at whi.wts.edu.
> Please contact klowery at whi.wts.edu for questions.