[sword-devel] SWORD 1.5.10

[DM Smith]

Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
> DM,
> 	Just a quick note: Chris is suggesting TEI because the OSIS group has 
> proposed adopting TEI lexical tags for inclusion into the OSIS spec.  I 
> suggest either Chris add his work to the existing osis filters making 
> SWORD OSIS functionality support the proposed new tags, or else invoking 
> both filters with a config like:
>
> SourceType=OSIS
> LocalOptionFilter=TEI
>   
I like the idea of stacking the filters.
Does this work now for Sword? (There is a TEI filter)

And does this allow mixing elements from the two? Specifically, would 
this allow the having osis <reference> elements in a TEI element?

Should this change be part of the 1.5.10?

> I like the layout direction you've taken with the NASB lexical work.  It 
> does make the lexica very flexible, as you have suggested.
>   
There are two changes that need to be made:
1) Handle !a notation. It would probably be best to handle it 
generically for all OSIS references and not just Strong's lemmas.
2) Handle self: as a prefix on an OSIS reference.

And should these be part of the 1.5.10 release?
> 	-Troy.
>
>
>
> DM Smith wrote:
>   
>> The one change that needs to be done before the NASB is released is the 
>> handling of Strong's numbers of the form G0019!a.
>>
>> (As to when I'll be done with the NASB Bible and Lexicons: I have about 
>> 40hours more work to do on it. So that will be at least a few more 
>> weeks. Then there will be a QA period of testing. Followed by delivery 
>> of the modules to Lockman. I don't know how long they will take before 
>> releasing it.)
>>
>> I'm not sure what the right implementation should be. But stripping off 
>> the !a will work fine, but won't work as well as it could.
>>
>> The NASB lexicons are significantly different in their content from 
>> Strong's dictionary. It appears that some of the entries have been split 
>> out into multiple entries.
>>
>> I'm currently using TEI for the lexicons. When there are multiple 
>> entries I am doing the following:
>> 1) Create a super entry containing entries for each of a, b, c, ..., 
>> where the key of the super entry is the Strong's Number without the a, 
>> b, c, ..., and the entries have the a, b, c (but there is no !) on the key.
>> 2) Also create a separate entry for each of a, b, c... with the a, b, c 
>> on the key (but w/o the !)
>>
>> So ideally a reference to G0019!a would first look for G0019a and 
>> failing that look for G0019.
>>
>> The point of doing it this way is that one could use the NASB lexicon 
>> with any module keyed with Strong's numbers and likewise could use any 
>> Strong's keyed lexicon with the NASB Bible.
>>
>> I don't know if there are any needed changes to the TEI Filters to 
>> render the super entries.
>>
>> Unfortunately, I don't have the time to make the change to the Sword API.
>>
>> For example (content obscured deliberately):
>> <superentry key="G0019">
>>         <entry key="G0019a">
>>                 <form>
>>                         <orth>....</orth>
>>                         <pron>....</pron>
>>                 </form>
>>                 <etym>....</etym>
>>                 <def>....</def>
>>                 <usg>....</usg>
>>         </entry>
>>         <entry key="G0019b">
>>                 <form>
>>                         <orth>....</orth>
>>                         <pron>....</pron>
>>                 </form>
>>                 <etym>....</etym>
>>                 <def>....</def>
>>                 <usg>....</usg>
>>         </entry>
>> </superentry>
>> <entry key="G0019a">
>>         <form>
>>                 <orth>....</orth>
>>                 <pron>....</pron>
>>         </form>
>>         <etym>....</etym>
>>         <def>....</def>
>>         <usg>....</usg>
>> </entry>
>> <entry key="G0019b">
>>         <form>
>>                 <orth>....</orth>
>>                 <pron>....</pron>
>>         </form>
>>         <etym>....</etym>
>>         <def>....</def>
>>         <usg>....</usg>
>> </entry>
>>
>>
>>
>> Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
>>     
>>> Agreed.  There have been many bug fixes.  If anyone would like to get any
>>> other fixes in, please do so very soon.
>>>
>>>      -Troy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Karl Kleinpaste <karl at kleinpaste.org> wrote: 
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> "Troy A. Griffitts" <scribe at crosswire.org> writes:
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> I should have tested it better before release.  My apologies.  Thank you
>>>>>       
>>>>> for reporting the problem.  I will also have a look at the InstallMgr 
>>>>> status bars and try to release a new BibleCS within a few days.
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> Might there be any estimate as to when a new release of the Sword libs
>>>> will happen?  There have been a number of fixes since last October's
>>>> 1.5.9, some of which have significant effects on GnomeSword's
>>>> operation.
>>>>
>>>> A 1.5.10 (or just 1.5.9.1) release would be hugely appreciated soon.
>>>>