To be honest, for many of our locales the apocryphae are irrelevant. E.g. in Persian where we publish 4 translations none of them have apocryphae. So, why expand the locales other than fo r a spurious sense of completeness?<br><br>Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird autocorrects.<div class="quote" style="line-height: 1.5"><br><br>-------- Original Message --------<br>Subject: Re: [sword-devel] lack of apocrypha localization<br>From: Karl Kleinpaste <karl@kleinpaste.org><br>To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum <sword-devel@crosswire.org><br>CC: <br><br><br type="attribution"><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/16/2017 11:17 AM, David Haslam
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1508167040350-0.post@n4.nabble.com">
<pre wrap="">What was his search pattern?</pre>
</blockquote>
<font face="FreeSerif">I just grep'd for some simple English word, I
think it was "dragon" (as in, Bel and the Dragon). I think it was
pretty obvious that, having found such a problem, all the locale
files should be given a once-over to determine if they're ready
for prime time. Most aren't.</font><br>
</body>
</html>
</blockquote></div>