[sword-devel] virtual modules

[Chris Little]

Greg Hellings wrote:
> I think that the plan is a good one.  We are dealing with a large amount 
> of redundant code in the case of parallel displays.  However, what if 
> two different front-ends want to display the parallel text in different 
> ways?  BibleCS does an internlinear display, but presents that 
> verse-by-verse.  What if one person wants to do them in parallel columns 
> (doesn't MacSword do that?) and another wants to do interlinear, but by 
> lines rather than verse?  I think that would be the strongest argument 
> against pushing the functionality back into the API.
>  
> Of course, it might be possible to push some of the parallel function 
> back into the API while still allowing that freedom for the front-ends 
> to maintain freedom of how they display the parallel passages.  But all 
> the ways of doing that that I can think of amount to only a minimal 
> saving of code for the front-ends.

I'm only suggesting collating the data. How it is rendered is still the 
frontend's responsibility. I would just hand it something like:
<verse osisID="A:bk.ch.vs">text</verse>
<verse osisID="B:bk.ch.vs">text</verse>
<verse osisID="C:bk.ch.vs">text</verse>

or potentially:
<verse osisID="bk.ch.vs">
<seg type="x-parallel" subType="x-A">text</seg>
<seg type="x-parallel" subType="x-B">text</seg>
<seg type="x-parallel" subType="x-C">text</seg>
</verse>

If that is rendered as a list, in parallel, that's fine. If as a table, 
in columns, that's fine too.

--Chris