[sword-devel] Wiki front end comparison

[Peter von Kaehne]

Barry Drake wrote:
> Hi there .....
> 
> I've only just had chance to take a proper look at the Wiki page.  It
> seems good as far as it goes, but I'm very concerned about the things it
> doesn't compare. 

why are you concerned? Fix it please. The bulk of the table was produced
by myself last night in a several hour session. In the end I saw stars
and did not find the simplest features anymore. So it is quite obvious
that I will not have been complete.


> We can't therefore say that BibleCS handles all of the modules properly:
> it doesn't!!!  It concerns me that the Wiki does not reflect this at
> all, and if I, as a new user pick BibleCS on the grounds that all the
> criteria are supposedly met (this is what the Wiki seems to suggest), I
> am going to dump the Sword Project at the first trial because it simply
> does not handle NET!!

The page states boldly that this page is in process of development. It
is not meant for endusers.

Yesterday morning it did not exist. Today it is in a state which leaves
the narratives aside and tries to come to a factual feature list -
clearly with massive gaps. Fix it. What is the exact limitation for fort
notes - 255 characters or something obvious like this? If so, put that
number down and check whether other frontends have similar limitations.

What is the longest footnote we have in any module?

This is not an attempt at redemption for any particular frontend, but an
attempt to create some clarity about features and limitations. It will
need to grow considerably still - and then the even worse work will
start of crystallising out the few bits which we want to present to end
users,

Peter

Peter