[sword-devel] Bibles in Beta

[DM Smith]

Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> The TurNTB has often verses grouped together, but this is not encoded
> ie.g. as  v4-6 but instead v4 has all content and v5 and v6 are empty.
> So the list you showed for it is endless in consequence.
>   
The wiki says that this module is known bad, so I'll assume that is the 
problem here.

In our modules we allow linking verses. If this were implemented in 
OSIS, then the module would have 5 and 6 pointing to verse 4. And verse 
4 would have the whole content.

In OSIS this would be something like:
<verse osisID="Gen.1.14 Gen.1.15">Tanrı şöyle buyurdu: ‹‹Gökkubbede 
gündüzü geceden ayıracak, yeryüzünü aydınlatacak ışıklar olsun. 
Belirtileri, mevsimleri, günleri, yılları göstersin.›› Ve öyle oldu.</verse>

By having it this way we can output verse numbers for the block. e.g.
(14-15) Tanrı şöyle buyurdu: ‹‹Gökkubbede gündüzü geceden ayıracak, 
yeryüzünü aydınlatacak ışıklar olsun. Belirtileri, mevsimleri, günleri, 
yılları göstersin.›› Ve öyle oldu.

BTW, BibleDesktop won't display it correctly. It will repeat the text 
for each verse! (This is a known bug.)
> I would think this + alternative versification is the case in many other
> Bibles.
>
> Personally I would suggest we are shooting us in our feet if we insist
> on perfection. "Good enough" is a hard to define but crucial standard.
>
> My suggestion is to put this list in a suitable format into each module
> as a list for further checking/errata and publish them nevertheless. If
> whole books or whole chapters are missing they need to be listed in the
> Conf file.
>
> With all these modules we should be working in an eternal (but hopefully
> ever slowing down) cycle of continuous improvement rather than
> delivering perfection once and then being able to forget about it.
>   

I agree for the most part. But, by pointing out what I did, perhaps the 
module creator might see a conversion problem and be able to fix it quickly.

> The real problem is that the structure of our repositories and the
> current access rules make it extremely hard to work in such a fashion.
> We need to find new ways of working on the modules, which are akin to
> the way we work on software - gradual improvements, frequent releases
> and many contributors.
>   
I think our current method of funnelling everything through Chris makes 
collaboration hard. (Chris, don't take it as criticism or a put down. I 
don't mean it that way. I appreciate all your hard work and your 
contributions!)

While writing this, I see that you replied to your own note along the 
lines that I was going to comment, so I'll just finish that part of my 
reply there.
> My suggestion - and I am talking here without having this fully though
> through:
>
> 1) lets clear out Beta now rapidly and divide the modules into actually
> working and actually not working + release the lot - even if there are
> flaws. Include in the released one an errata file for now
>
> 2) have a broad and thorough discussion on how we are going to run the
> module repository subsequently in order to facilitate increased content,
>  constantly improving content in terms of increasing features and
> decreasing error
>
> Peter
>
> DM Smith wrote:
>   
>> For what it's worth, I've "scoped out" the Bibles in beta, comparing 
>> them to the KJV versification. (I skipped the GenBook Bibles) I wrote a 
>> little program using JSword to do the work. Hopefully, I didn't make a 
>> mistake in writing it. (I've spot checked it against GnomeSword.)
>>
>> Below are the results. They are broken up by testament (i.e. OT and NT) 
>> and by verses in scope and verses not in scope (i.e. InScope, OutScope). 
>> Obviously, only one of these was necessary, but it is quicker to note 
>> potential problems. The results are displayed as osisRefs.
>>
>> I find some of the results surprising:
>> The last verse of many chapters is missing.
>> Malachi 4 is missing from many Bibles.
>>
>> While this may be just an alternate versification, I think that it might 
>> be a good idea to spot check the "missing" verses against the source 
>> (where ever it came from) and possibly a hard copy. If anyone can pitch 
>> in that would be great.
>>
>> My personal feeling is that we should not release incomplete Bibles. 
>> (like turNTB!!!)
>>
>> In Him,
>>     DM
>>