<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
It has been stated on this mailing list that v11n is a priority that
has been scheduled. It impacts more than just the Sword API, it also
affects all the clients of that API. This will be a significant design
change that will require the involvement of the various frontents in
order to have a successful release. So between now and then, modules
with alternate v11n will continue to be a problem. Attempts to address
the problem before then are problematic as well.<br>
<br>
>From my perspective, the Sword API makes Sword modules accessible to
clients, one of which is BibleCS. Alternate v11n is not part of the
picture now.<br>
<br>
C. N. R. wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid20050420075536.71252.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com"
type="cite"><font size="2"></font>
<p><font size="2">I've sent an answer to Mr Little but, not
unexpectedly, he didn't reply. Well, he is strongly defending his own
view of the purpose of the SWORD Project, even if everyone else seems
to have a different opinion.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">I am impressed by the fact that Mr Little wants to
rebuild the Romanian Orthodox Bible (ROB) module, a daunting task for
someone who doesn't understand the Romanian language. I am rather
alarmed about what the result might be. But, apart from language
problems, the main difficulty remains that of numbering. We have
already discussed Psalm 9 and 10 (in the KJV; Psalm 9 only in the
Septuagint and Vulgate), the point at which the numbering of the Psalms
divides between versions. Not only that, but the verse numbering
differs from the start, since the Septuagint and Vulgate number the
introductory description of Psalm 9 as a separate verse, and the KJV
does not. Anything other than strictly parallel texts, adhering to the
same system of versification, would be extremely hard to use for anyone
who had an imperfect understanding of some of the languages he or she
was dealing with. Remember that not only whole psalms, but many of
their individual verses, begin and end in differe! nt places.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">I hear that Mr Little has begun work on
transforming the Vulgate (Clementine version) into the new style. I
don't think it will be an improvement. Indeed, it is likely to be as
wrong as the Estonian module, already on the SWORD official site, which
defectively repeats the same verse from Exodus to Job.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">I submitted the Romanian Orthodox Bible (ROB)
module in November 2004, but it was refused by Mr Little, because "the
SWORD actual policy is to not admit any changes of versification" ! As
if The SWORD Project were conceived for the Byzantine Orthodox
versification, not for the KJV's one. In fact, Mr Little seems to deny
that KJV versification is used, although the index of books, chapters
and verses in The SWORD Project (as in e-Sword, BiblePro, Online Bible
and Theophilos) reproduces the KJV's versification exactly ! Moreover,
all these biblical programs are delivered by their creators with a KJV
or ASV module built-in. In fact, the SWORD's own module generator
vpl2mod.exe is also designed for the KJV standard. That's why I
asserted that this is an international standard -- of course for
electronic versions of the various Bibles, not for the printed ones. I
really don’t see how Mr Little can deny that the KJV standard is the
basis for the entire SWORD project; this! just flies in the face of the
evidence.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">I have changed the versification scheme of the
Romanian Orthodox Bible (more precisely that of the Book of Psalms), to
make it fit the KJV's verse numbering. The fact that the KJV's
versification system is the standard of The SWORD Project is beyond my
control. But I have always compared the Romanian text with the KJV and
ASV texts, to make sure they were the same, and this was the hardest
part of my work. In some Psalms, I had to paste two verses together, or
make two verses from a single one.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">This was necessary because the Romanian Old
Testament is a translation of the Septuagint (a non-Masoretic version
of the OT). The Byzantine Bible was translated into Romanian for the
first time in 1688, and has much the same structure as the Septuagint.
The Orthodox Bible authorized from 1936 to 1994 is in fact a revision
of the Byzantine one of 1688 (the so-called "Bible from Bucharest" of
the voivode Serban Cantacuzino). In the Romanian version, there are
chapters longer or shorter with a number of verses, so the only way to
make them fit the KJV's versification scheme is to compare the texts
and modify the versification where necessary.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">I mention that <b>I haven't altered</b> the
Romanian text at all, <b>not even a single word</b>: in fact the texts
are the same, only the versification differs. For example, when a Psalm
in the Romanian version has two or three verses fewer than the KJV, you
must first compare the texts, then split the Romanian verses at the
exact places where the verses in the KJV begin or end, and match all
verse numbers to the KJV. Inversely, when a Psalm in the Romanian
version has more verses than the KJV, you should paste together certain
verses in the Romanian text, according to the KJV's versification. I
have already mentioned the problem with the numbering of Pss 9 and 10;
but it is not as simple as that, because later the opposite happens at
Psalm 147, so that both texts become parallel again until 150 (The
Orthodox and Vulgate Psalm 151 is missing from the Hebrew and KJV
texts.) It is unfortunate that the divergences happened at the
beginning and end of the book, so that almost! all the Psalms have
different numbers.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">That's why I find it hard to believe that a
Romanian Orthodox module for SWORD could be built in keeping the
original Romanian versification... How would for instance Mr. Little
handle the Psalm 18, which is 54 verses long, instead of 50 in KJV ?
And would be this Psalm 18, as in all the current modules, or 17 like
in the original Bible ?</font></p>
<p><font size="2">But Mr. Little hasn't refused only me, he also
refused a Polish module creator, Mr Wojciech, (who made the Biblia
Gdanska and other Polish modules), Mr Artemis State (with D.
Cornilescu's complete Romanian version: the one on the CrossWire site
is defective at I Peter 2-5 and it's in an old orthography) and I
presume others too.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">In an earlier communication, Mr. Little wrote: "I
would prefer that we simply be given links to source material so that
someone from CrossWire can work on the modules themselves. I believe it
is less likely that they will editorialize as they do markup &
conversion." So we -- the creators of the other modules -- should give
up making SWORD modules, and write HTMs instead ? It's a pity that the
people at CrossWire don't accept the contributions of learned and
meticulous volunteers, who fully understand their texts, only to give
themselves the same work, starting from zero and without understanding
the texts. It seems discriminatory, to say the least. And I am still
worrying about what will happen to the Romanian Orthodox Bible in the
hands of someone who has no idea of the Romanian language at all.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">The most troublesome part of this is that all the
SWORD contributors who have laboured long and hard to make modules of
Septuagint-based texts no longer have a clear idea what to do. The fact
that The SWORD Project already has so many well made modules is a
testimony to their energy and effort. Taking the versification out of
their skilled hands and transferring it to an unproven central system
of limited linguistic skill seems a shabby reward for their work, and a
recipe for confusion in the future.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">In the service of the Lord,</font></p>
<p><font size="2">Catalin N. Ravaru</font></p>
<p><font size="2">--------------------------------------</font></p>
<font size="2"><b><i></i></b></font>
<p><font size="2"><b><i>C. N. R. <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:biblology@yahoo.com"><biblology@yahoo.com></a></i></b>
wrote:</font></p>
<p><font size="2">Chris Little wrote, about the use of KJV
versification:<br>
<br>
< < I don't know where you got that idea, but it is entirely
wrong. It's really difficult to argue that the purpose behind Sword was
comparative reading when you consider that parallel Bibles have only
been supported since roughly the time when the 1.5.6 frontends came
out. > ><br>
<br>
And since that time, all users have thought of Sword as a system whose
main (and considerable) advantage was that it provided comparative
reading.<br>
<br>
< < Furthermore, the KJV versification is ABSOLUTELY NOT the
standard--international or otherwise. > > <br>
<br>
But it <b>is</b> the system used in the index that accesses all the
modules. And in modules where the numbering differs from that of the
KJV, it is the KJV numbering is given first, and the version's original
numbering is given afterwards in brackets. Since both the LXX and the
Vulgate have a single Psalm 9 where the KJV has Pss 9 and 10, this do!
uble numbering has to be sustained throughout the remaining 141 psalms.<br>
<br>
OK, this system is not the neatest that could be imagined, and it would
be very nice to have an index that led you to the same verse in each
version and gave you that version's native numbering. But the present
system is the only one available, and it is easy to understand and use;
and since you are actually using it yourselves, I can't understand why
you seem to be so<br>
against it.<br>
<br>
When someone does write this useful facility for accessing alternative
verses, all the affected modules are going to have to be altered
anyway. If I am spared, I will be happy to provide a version of my own
module with the original numbering, and I am sure you will not lack
willing help with the other versions. Until then, there is no point in
doing so, because it won't work as a Sword module.<br>
<br>
Chris Little also wrote:<br>
<br>
< < I would prefer that we simply be given links to source
material so that so! meone from CrossWire can work on the modules
themselves. I believe it is less likely that they will editorialize as
they do markup & conversion. > ><br>
<br>
Oh, please. What kind of people do you think we are ?<br>
<br>
I think I speak for all suppliers of modules with non-KJV versification
when I say that we are now thoroughly confused and don't know what to
do.<br>
<br>
In the service of the Lord,<br>
Catalin N. Ravaru</font></p>
<p><font size="2">---------------------------------------</font></p>
<font size="2"><b><i></i></b></font>
<p><font size="2"><b><i>Chris Little <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:chrislit@crosswire.org"><chrislit@crosswire.org></a></i></b>
wrote:</font></p>
<p><font size="2">C. N. R. wrote: < < Dear SWORD users, In
spite of Mr Chris Little's opinions, the SWORD program was conceived <b>to
make possible the comparative reading</b> of several Bible versions,
and the standard is the King James Version. > ></font></p>
<p><font size="2">I don't know where you got that idea, but it is
entirely wrong. It's really difficult to argue that the purpose behind
Sword was comparative reading when you consider that parallel Bibles
have only been supported since roughly the time when the 1.5.6
frontends came out. Furthermore, the KJV versification is ABSOLUTELY
NOT the standard--international or otherwise.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">Catholic and Orthodox traditions vary GREATLY from
the KJV versification. ALL original language texts (Hebrew, Greek,
Latin, & anything else you might consider original language) differ
SIGNIFICANTLY from the KJV versification. NO modern commercial Bibles
use the KJV versification, to my knowledge (NKJV might be an exception
for obvious reasons, but I doubt that even). Even genetic descentants
of the KJV like the NASB and NRSV use different versification
standards. So "standardizing" on the KJV versification is utterly
arbitrary and even if one WERE to set a specific versification as
"standard" (which I think would be a profoundly bad idea) the KJV
versification is demonstrably inferior to virtually any other
versification in use.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">< < How could comparative or parallel reading
be possible -- let alone the use of commentaries -- if we do not adjust
the versification of foreign Bibles to make it compatible with that of
the KJV ? What I've done with the Romanian Orthodox Bible, more
exactly with the Book of Psalms, has already been done with other
versions of the Bible, such as the LXX which is at this moment on the
SWORD site. How would Mr Chris Little handle the Romanian (and
Septuagint, and Vulgate) Psalm no 9, which in KJV is in fact two Psalms
(no. 9 and 10) ? Would he paste together the Psalm 10 and the "last
valid verse" of the Psalm 9 ? In fact this new rule, "we don't accept
alterations of versification", <b>makes comparative reading impossible</b>,
which is the main feature of The SWORD Project program ! > ></font></p>
<p><font size="2">I've addressed this previously. Apparently I need
to repeat myself. We use the best source texts we can get. We will
happily accept improvements to existing modules. We will not accept
altered versions of texts, however--especially when the unaltered
versions are readily available.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">You took publicly available copies of the Biblia
Gdanska and modified the versification to be more like that of the KJV.
Ask yourself: If the KJV is the international standard, WHY is this
Bible posted in some other versification? The answer is clear: because
its own versification is the versification with which its users are
familiar. "Comparative reading" is a nice feature, but is secondary to
a Bible actually being useful to its user community.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">This kind of activity is why I do not like to
accept any content converted by users. I would prefer that we simply be
given links to source material so that someone from CrossWire can work
on the modules themselves. I believe it is less likely that they will
editorialize as they do markup & conversion.</font></p>
<p><font size="2">--Chris</font></p>
<p><font size="2">---------------------------------------</font></p>
<font size="2"><b><i></i></b></font>
<p><font size="2"><b><i>C. N. R. <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:biblology@yahoo.com"><biblology@yahoo.com></a></i></b>
wrote:</font></p>
<p><font size="2">Dear SWORD users, </font></p>
<p><font size="2">In spite of Mr Chris Little's opinions, the SWORD
program was conceived <b>to make possible the comparative reading</b>
of several Bible versions, and the standard is the King James Version.
How could comparative or parallel reading be possible -- let alone the
use of commentaries -- if we do not adjust the versification of foreign
Bibles to make it compatible with that of the KJV ? What I've done with
the Romanian Orthodox Bible, more exactly with the Book of Psalms, has
already been done with other versions of the Bible, such as the LXX
which is at this moment on the SWORD site. How would Mr Chris Little
handle the Romanian (and Septuagint, and Vulgate) Psalm no 9, which in
KJV is in fact two Psalms (no. 9 and 10) ? Would he paste together the
Psalm 10 and the "last valid verse" of the Psalm 9 ? In fact this new
rule, "we don't accept alterations of versification", <b>makes
comparative reading impossible</b>, which is the main feature of The
SWORD Project pr! ogram ! </font></p>
<p><font size="2">In the service of the Lord, </font></p>
<p><font size="2">Catalin N. Ravaru</font></p>
<br>
<br>
<p>__________________________________________________<br>
Do You Yahoo!?<br>
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.yahoo.com">http://mail.yahoo.com</a> </p>
<pre wrap="">
<hr size="4" width="90%">
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org">sword-devel@crosswire.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel">http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel</a>
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>