[sword-devel] KJV OT morphology

[DM Smith]

Chris,

We are getting close to getting the KJV2006 out the door. I think we  
will release it at the same time as BibleCS.

I know you have been very busy with school and have not had time to  
do this. But I thought I'd provide a reminder. I don't think it would  
take too much for me to replace the OLB codes with the ones you come  
up with. So maybe we can turn it around quickly. If not in time for  
the release of BibleCS, then hopefully before the CD is finalized.

In His Service,
	DM

On Mar 8, 2006, at 7:58 PM, Chris Little wrote:

> Presuming we aren't looking to put the KJV2006 out the door TODAY  
> or anything, I will work on a new morphology akin to the Robinson &  
> Packard morphologies that we can convert using a 1:1 mapping from  
> the OLB codes. It should be very quick to produce, I just need a  
> little time to get to it. :) Then we can present something a little  
> less opaque, that users MIGHT have a possibility of decoding  
> without reference to a long code list.
>
> --Chris
>
>
> Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
>> DM,
>>     Chris has been about as accurate and specific on the source as  
>> I understand the situation.  The Online-Bible (OLB) software guys  
>> created a system that extended their strongs list above the normal  
>> range and added all these new 'strongs numbers' that map to  
>> combinations of morphology.  'OLBStrongMorph' is about as accurate  
>> and descriptive as we can be, I guess.  I'd opt for something a  
>> little shorter, but don't really care.  I haven't come across any  
>> consistently used name for this system of morphology.  Hope that  
>> helps a bit.
>>     -Troy.
>> DM Smith wrote:
>>> When creating a "proper" OSIS document work ids are to be  
>>> declared in the header.
>>>
>>> I was trying to figure out one for this and if whether anything  
>>> was using it or could use it and whether it could be changed to  
>>> something more meaningful.
>>>
>>> chrislit at crosswire.org wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> They are OLB verbal morphology codes, I believe. I think the "T"  
>>>> stands for tense, and may be a relic of GBF encoding of this  
>>>> data. We should probably create a new morphology code system and  
>>>> convert these codes to that. But for the moment, preserve them  
>>>> at least.
>>>>
>>>> They should map into the old BDB (probably derived from OLBHEB)  
>>>> module that is no longer available. I suppose that is not  
>>>> particularly helpful. :)
>>>>
>>>> --Chris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, DM Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In the KJV OT I find the following type of morphology.
>>>>> Does anyone know what this indexes into?
>>>>>
>>>>> morph="strongMorph:TH8804
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
>>>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
>>>> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
>>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
>>> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
>> _______________________________________________
>> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
>> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
>
> _______________________________________________
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page