<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:56 AM, <a href="mailto:refdoc@gmx.net">refdoc@gmx.net</a> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:refdoc@gmx.net" target="_blank">refdoc@gmx.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">In respect of John's recent threads on correct encoding of various apocryphal texts, I had a look again at our support for GenBook bibles. The wiki lists this as in development, but whatever development has happened in last few years, it has not impacted onto GenBook bibles.<br>
<br>
So my questions are:<br>
<br>
Do we still intend to support these in the library? <br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Last time I asked Troy the answer was no. This was an initial proposal before av11n was conceived and implemented.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
If so, which bits are missing in terms of support?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Lots of them, but not all.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
If so, what specific place do you see for GenBook bibles within our ecology?<br>
<br>
GenBook bibles do not support reference translation and this is a known serious drawback, unlikely to be overcome. But I think this is not enough a reason to totally abandon them:<br>
<br>
My proposal is that we use GenBook bibles as stepping stone for texts which do not fit well, but are either unlikely to ever support an independent v11n or are in an area of much flux. This would allow us to bypass the in the past not infrequent impasse where we have new important texts but still argue about a new scheme. Download statistics will then also go into our decision 're viability and need for a new v11n.<br>
<br>
My proposal is to make this an active project again and iron out any bugs and missing pieces in order to aim for use of the facility within the next release iteration.<br>
<br>
Any thoughts?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'm a big advocate for giving the most flexibility to the content creators rather than to the software. Modern devices, including smartphones, tend to have plenty of oomph to get through the little bit of extra computation necessary that av11n instead allows us to optimize away. But it's also a sight bit more difficult to implement and maintain. So, unless there is developer dedication to it, it's unlikely to see the light of day. As with most software, that's one of the biggest trade offs: ease of correct implementation vs developer time.</div><div><br></div><div>--Greg</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Peter </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Sent from my Huawei Mobile<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird autocorrects.<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
sword-devel mailing list: <a href="mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org">sword-devel@crosswire.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.crosswire.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/sword-devel</a><br>
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page</blockquote></div><br></div></div>