[osis-users] OSIS cross-reference questions

Brian J Dumont brian.j.dumont at gmail.com
Thu Nov 22 10:42:05 MST 2012

Hi Markku,

I am not an OSIS expert, but I will give an attempt:

1) I would suggest both of these as legitimate OSIS which you could 
select between:
<note n="1"><reference osisRef="Gen.1.3 Exod.26.15-Exod.26.30">Genesis 
1, 3; Ex. 26, 15 -30</reference></note>


<note n="1"><reference osisRef="Gen.1.3">Genesis 1, 3</reference>; 
<reference osisRef="Exod.26.15-Exod.26.30">Ex. 26, 15 -30</reference></note>

One thing that I'm pretty sure is INVALID is a reference like:
<note n="1"><reference osisRef="Gen.1.3 Exod.26.15-30">Genesis 1, 3; Ex. 
26, 15 -30</reference></note>

or anything with nested <note>s

2)mostly covered above, but let me expound:
<note n="1"><p>This note gives explanation of why these references are 
here, including <reference osisRef="Gen.1.3">Genesis 1, 
3</reference></note>.</p><p>This second paragraph within the same note 
goes on to say <reference osisRef="Exod.26.15-Exod.26.30">Ex. 26, 15 

3) To my understanding this is allowed in OSIS but unsupported and hence 
I would avoid.

I hope this helps some.  Like I say, not an expert, but I'm pretty sure 
this works.


On 11/22/2012 09:40 AM, Markku Pihlaja wrote:
> I'm feeling a bit alone here now - quite a few questions still remain 
> unanswered after several days, and they are rather crucial for me to 
> continue my work.
> To make answering easier, I'll sum up some more: there are now three 
> fundamental questions that need answers - all other questions are 
> actually derived from trying to solve them. So if you can't find 
> answers to these three (marked with Roman numbers I...III), feel free 
> to help with the previous ones (Arabic numbers 1...7 - or actually 
> 2...6; 1 and 7 are the same as I and III).
> ---------------------------
> *I.* How do I markup a single but compound cross-reference that refers 
> to non-adjacent verses or ranges, so that it (structurally) differs 
> from a (more typical) note containing separate references to the same 
> verses/ranges?
> *II.* How do I markup a reference to a note whose source is more 
> complex than just one verse or a contiguous range?
> *III.* Is it possible to have a reference's osisRef with a 
> sub-identifier without a corresponding osisID having that (or any) 
> sub-identifier?
> *
> *
> Example:
> <verse osisID="*Deut.32.15*" sID="Deut.32.15" />Jeshurun grew fat and 
> kicked; filled with food, he became heavy and sleek. He abandoned the 
> God who made him and rejected the Rock his Savior.<verse 
> eID="Deut.32.15" />
> ...
> <reference osisRef="*Deut.32.15!part2*">
> ---------------------------
> And then to the wider variety of derived questions. No need to read 
> further if you managed to answer all three previous ones :).
> I tried running different kinds of osisIDs through a validator 
> integrated to oXygen. As expected, a hyphen in an osisID wouldn't 
> validate. But the list of multiple space-separated single IDs does 
> pass the validation.
> Well, if we trust in what passes through the validator, I get answers 
> to many of my own questions (IF we trust the validator, that is):
> *2)* Is listing multiple individual osisIDs separated by a space 
> really allowed in *a)*osisIDs *b)* osisRefs?
> a) YES and b) YES, even though after carefully examining the type 
> declarations for osisRefRegex and osisIDRegex in the 
> osisCore.2.1.1.xsd file I still haven't found out how the spaces could 
> be valid.
> *3)* If the answer to 2a) is yes, what is allowed with a compound ID 
> like that?
> It seems that any valid osisID will do as a component of such a 
> compound osisID.
> Specifically, can I use sub-identifiers?
> Thus: YES. But the exclamation mark and sub-identifier will need to be 
> attached to one of the component IDs, it can't follow a space.
> *4)* If the answer to 2b) is yes, what is allowed in that compound 
> ref? Specifically, are ranges allowed in such compound refs?
> Trying with a validator, it seems: YES. For example, this is judged valid:
> osisRef="Gen.1.3 Gen.1.5-Gen.1.7 Gen.2.2-Gen.2.5"
> even though Durusay's manual says that "a single osisRef cannot 
> identify a discontiguous range of a work".
> This would seem to provide a step closer to being able to refer to 
> notes with the more complex sources I've been talking about (question 
> II.), although not quite. [Note that this wouldn't apply to normal 
> compound references to verses].
> This would be valid:
> <note type="crossReference" osisID="*Deut.32.15 
> Deut.32.17!crossReference*">
> ...
> <reference osisRef="*Deut.32.15 Deut.32.17!crossReference*">Deut. 
> 32.15,17</reference>
> although !crossReference being attached only to verse 17 gives a 
> slightly false impression. Moreover, this would not be valid:
> <note type="crossReference" osisID="*Deut.32.15 
> Deut.32.17-Deut.32.22!crossReference*">
> because of the hyphen in an osisID.
> My next idea would be rather unorthodox, and I hope you consider twice 
> before answering "no, of course that can't be done". I would love to 
> solve this problem in a beautiful, "standard OSIS" way. But since 
> nobody has given me a sufficient answer to how to do it, it seems I 
> need to get creative, with the cost of some "standard" conventions.
> The osisRefRegex and osisIDRegex type declarations (and thus also 
> validators) allow some slightly peculiar formats, including "1.Gen.2", 
> "1.2.Gen", "1_.2", "1._.2" and even "_". Of course there is usually no 
> reason to use these forms.
> *7)* Would something like this be acceptable?
> <note type="crossReference" 
> osisID="*Deut.32.15.Deut.32.17!crossReference*">
> ...
> <reference osisRef="*Deut.32.15.Deut.32.17!crossReference*">Deut. 
> 32.15,17</reference>
> or
> <note type="crossReference" 
> osisID="*Deut.32.15.Deut.32.17.Deut.32.22_Deut.32.26!crossReference*">
> Funny as they look, they really are valid OSIS. So: what reasons are 
> there NOT to use them? I would of course document this convention 
> carefully. I emphasize the fact that I do need a way to refer to 
> *notes* in addition to verses and ranges.
> Well, hopefully some of this is answerable.
> Thanks again in advance, and sorry for bothering you with such long 
> messages.
> Markku
> 21. Nov 2012 Markku Pihlaja:
>     Thanks for the reply,
>     2012/11/21 <davidtroidl at aol.com>
>         Deut. 32:15,17,22--26could be marked up
>         <reference osisRef="Deut.32.15">Deut. 32:15</reference>,
>         <reference osisRef="Deut.32.17">17</reference>, <reference
>         osisRef="Deut.32.22-Deut.32.26">22-26</reference>
>     I've tried explaining this earlier: that just isn't enough for us
>     here.
>     There would be no structural difference between a note containing
>     that one compound reference that consists of three verses (or
>     ranges), and a note containing a list of three separate
>     references. The only difference might be in the separator tokens,
>     but those are outside the markup and shouldn't count.
>     I'll make the problem even clearer: how do you markup this list of
>     four different references (I'll mark each with a different color)?
>     Deut. 32:15;Deut. 32.17;Deut. 22-26;Deut. 32:15,17,22--26
>     This one is of course a rather imaginary and unreal example -
>     there would probably never be a list where the three verses/ranges
>     are first individual references and then form a compound one - but
>     using the same verses here shows the problem more clearly.
>     The note marker appearing in the text for this whole list of four
>     references should be one single note, not four, so (as stated
>     previously in this discussion by DM) all these should be packaged
>     within just one pair of <note> tags.
>     What you're suggesting would be a list of six separate references,
>     the three last ones just being separated with commas instead of
>     semicolons, and the "Deut." being omitted from the content part of
>     the last two - but those separators and the missing book names are
>     content instead of structure markup. Structurally that would be
>     the identical three references listed twice.
>         osisID's are meant to be unique identifiers for book, chapter
>         and verse elements in a bible.  They should not be used in
>         notes, and they should not contain multiple references
>     I don't quite agree, at least on not being for use in notes, and
>     nor does Durusau's manual. For instance lines 2, 5, 8 and 11 in
>     the example on page 45 show notes with osisID's. Also, osisID is
>     listed as one of the attributes of the note element (as well as
>     basically any other element, too).
>     Isn't the main purpose of an ID to be used for referring to the
>     element it represents, regardless of the element's type? And I do
>     need to be able to refer to notes here, so the obvious (and maybe
>     even only?) way would be using the osisID. I just need to find a
>     good way of naming notes with a source more complex than just one
>     verse, and referring to them.
>     --------------
>     About osisIDs not being able to contain multiple references: about
>     this, too, the Durusau manual disagrees. On page 89 there's the
>     example
>     <p osisID="Matt.1.1 Matt.1.2 Matt.1.3">...</p>,
>     although I did wonder about the correctness of this in my previous
>     message, since I couldn't find such syntax in the OSIS schema.
>     But if osisIDs really are only able to refer to one verse, then
>     I hope someone can suggest an alternative method for what I need
>     to do.
>      Markku
> _______________________________________________
> osis-users mailing list
> osis-users at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/osis-users

"Silly customer!  You cannot hurt a Twinkie!" - Apu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/osis-users/attachments/20121122/ecb62890/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the osis-users mailing list