<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<font face="FreeSerif">I have a <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://github.com/crosswire/xiphos/issues/1107">Xiphos
bug</a> in which the facility to take a Strong's dict entry and
search the Bible module for all its occurrences sometimes works
and sometimes doesn't.<br>
<br>
The mechanism is straightforward: Take the key from the dict pane,
note whether this is Heb or Grk, construct e.g. lemma:Hxxxxx,
stuff that into the sidebar search, and execute the search. No
sweat.<br>
<br>
The problem is with Heb refs. Because of the ancient habit that
Heb Strong's refs are given a leading zero prefix (e.g. "07225")
as a weak discriminant from Grk refs in the same number space, I
actually handle this case explicitly. Strong's module keys are
fixed, 5-digit strings, and the dict pane always shows this. When
that key is taken to build the lemma search, I specifically
include the last leading zero in the Heb case.<br>
<br>
This works in KJV and ESV where we find "<w
savlm="strong:H07225">In the beginning</w>".<br>
This fails in NASB and OSHB where we find "<w
savlm="strong:H7225">In the beginning</w>".<br>
Note H07225 vs H7225.<br>
<br>
The question revolves around what a Strong's ref ontologically is.
Seriously, what is it?<br>
Is it a number, written naturally with minimal required digits,
stored for convenience in a character string?<br>
Or is it a specific and fixed string of characters?<br>
<br>
In terms of module keys, it's a string of characters.<br>
In terms of Bible markup, well... Opinion varies. As we see in
this case, some Bibles encode as a natural number, occupying the
normal (minimal) digits needed, but others take the fixed string
approach so as to include a leading zero, but note that it's not a
full, fixed, 5-digit string to match a dict key; it's just one
leading zero, no matter how many natural digits follow. KJV
encodes the 1st Heb ref as "01". Not "1" (natural number) and not
"00001" (module key); just "01".<br>
<br>
Result is that, by constructing zero-prefixed searches, such
searches always fail in Bibles using natural/minimal digits
because there's never a zero-prefixed match.<br>
<br>
This is different from Grk refs, which are stored in dict modules
the same as Heb dict keys -- fixed 5-digit -- but are always
marked up as natural numbers using minimal digits.<br>
<br>
As matters stand, I have no <i>a priori</i> means by which to
determine what to expect in a Bible's Heb Strong's markup. The
dict pane's key from which to construct the search is fixed 5
digits. That is at first trimmed to natural, minimal digits...and
then the trouble starts because I don't have anything like a
module conf directive to tell me whether the module uses
zero-prefixed Heb refs or not. I'm also not aware that we have any
standard for such markup to which I can point to say, "NASB's
markup is wrong because it lacks zero-prefixing on Heb refs."<br>
<br>
Help.<br>
</font>
</body>
</html>