[sword-devel] Av11n mark 2

[Konstantin Maslyuk]

> And it shouldn't be used. :)

It should not be used for one only purpose and we will reject a usefull feature? :^S

Today we have years from new v11n appeared in Sword and most of frontends be released with that v11n. Same for if error was in v11n. And most annoying will be when we will release bug fixes for mapping data, some old apps/some old platforms would never get such fixes.

It would be used for some rare texts. I did not meet such, but i count if text (version) author intentionally change verse index, we have to leave it, but correctly translate to other v11ns.

By the way v11ns for rare texts will be used by ~0,001% of users,  and will be delivered to all. Isn't it better to store v11n in to those one/two modules?

One can build own module repository with different v11ns, and it will be compatible with all Sword apps. 
It is just freedom that would bring unexpected good use cases , but we suppress freedom for the sake of one bad.

Maybe there were another points, can't remember.

-----Исходное сообщение-----
От: "Troy A. Griffitts" <scribe �� crosswire.org>
Отправлено: ‎15.‎07.‎2015 14:19
Кому: "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum" <sword-devel �� crosswire.org>
Тема: Re: [sword-devel] Av11n mark 2

Yeah, that doesn't help me either.  We abandoned GenBook Bible support
in favor of the VersificationMgr system.  I am not against adding a
per-module v11n mechanism, but I fear it will be used. :)  And it
shouldn't be used. :)  Using this basically allows people to take
shortcuts bypassing the analysis of the versification of their module
and trying to identify it most closely with a common v11n.  This is
important as it allow us to display the module with v11n mapping across
different systems.  We discussed ways one could also use the mechanism
appropriately: selected the closest common v11n and supplying mappings
for the verses which aren't covered by that v11n.  But my experience
would lead me to speculate that if we allow custom v11n, then everyone
will use it for their module-- even if there are only a couple
differences in v11n between their module and a common v11n system,
because they won't need to spend the time to analyze and learn about
their text and v11ns which we support well.  Allowing v11n loading per
module is fairly straightforward to implement and I believe JSword might
already have a file format they support.

Regarding this thread.  If we need to add 2 new v11ns for French and
Danish, then we need to spend the time to do the research and add a
versification and mapping data.

Troy



On 07/15/2015 01:03 PM, DM Smith wrote:
> 
>> On Jul 15, 2015, at 6:59 AM, Karl Kleinpaste <karl �� kleinpaste.org
>> <mailto:karl �� kleinpaste.org>> wrote:
>>
>> On 07/15/2015 06:35 AM, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
>>> 1) Unlike the other av11n implementation it does not yet show non KJV
>>> verse range content.
>> I'm confused. If genbook Bibles are essentially self-contained in
>> terms of v11n, how can a genbook Bible not display all its own content?
> 
> I read Peter’s comment that it wouldn’t handle a verse range properly if
> one or both of the ends was not in the KJV versification.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel �� 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 �� crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
----------- �������� ����� -----------
�������� � ������� HTML ���� ���������&hellip;
URL: <http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/attachments/20150715/8786ba9e/attachment.html>