[sword-devel] Av11n and coverage

[Daniel Owens]

Yes, mapping! I don't have strong opinion about how this works out on 
the engine side of things, but proper mapping between versifications for 
front-ends that support parallel display is essential for doing work 
with Old Testament Hebrew and Greek texts and with modern translations.

I have happily used BibleTime frequently in my dissertation because it 
supports parallel display and effectively uses the mag window to display 
lemma and morphology, which I much prefer to the clutter of Strongs 
numbers in the main screen. But putting two Bibles side-by-side (which I 
do almost all the time) creates problems. When I put the ESV 
side-by-side with OSMHB or the forthcoming Wesminster Hebrew Morphology, 
it is a mess. Content invariably gets dropped at the end of the chapter. 
Add LXX and it is not workable (chapters are offset).

Daniel

On 01/07/2012 07:54 AM, DM Smith wrote:
> I agree with Chris.
>
> It will take a lot of work in the SWORD and JSword engine to implement it.
>
> If anything we should develop a v11n that can be read in from a resource file. But before that I'd like to see support for mapping from one v11n to another.
>
> In Him,
> 	DM
>
> On Jan 6, 2012, at 6:31 PM, Chris Little wrote:
>
>> On 1/6/2012 1:29 AM, David Haslam wrote:
>>> Extending Peter's concept, might we also make the book order something that
>>> can be worked with by front-end developers?
>>>
>>> e.g. For the NT in Eastern Canonical order we might have:
>>>
>>> Scope=Matt-Acts James-Jude Rom-Heb Rev
>>>
>>> i.e. with the General Epistles ordered prior to the Pauline Epistles.
>> I am very much against this idea. (I have no problem with different book orders, and would happily add a new v11n system if the need can be proven to me and the data can be provided to me.)
>>
>> Scope/Coverage is very strongly dependent on the reference system (v11n) used. And other aspects of the library, such as verse reference resolution, are very dependent on the reference system as well. An osisRef such as "Matt-Jude" has to mean something within the context of a particular reference system. In the KJV v11n, this means all of the text of the NT except Revelation. If we were to support use of Scope/Coverage to re-order books, we would be creating new de facto v11ns. Under the above Scope, the osisRef "Matt-Jude" has a very different meaning from what would be expected, assuming the KJV v11n were still employed.
>>
>> Fundamentally, I think we should avoid adding new, complex methods of solving problems for which we already have solutions. In particular, the book-ordering issue can already be addressed by addition of new v11ns. The number of cases where two v11ns differ only in the ordering of their books is probably quite minimal and better served by adding a new v11n.
>>
>>> This would be a further step towards "canon neutrality" as expounded by Neil
>>> Rees ("Studge") at BibleTech 2010.
>> I'm also not clear on how this would achieve canon neutrality.
>>
>> --Chris
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>