<html><head></head><body>I believe I understand what we're talking about, but please correct me if I am wrong.<br><br>A long long time ago in a galaxy far far away, our data from Bible Foundation which was originally produced by them with the intend to be used by the Online Bible software package had "extended strongs" numbers which identified various verb tenses. So verbs would have 2 numbers, the first for the strongs lemma and the second for the parsing of the verb.<br><br>We are not trying to continue to support this system. Please do not include these numbers in new modules. There are not many of these numbers and a simple mapping from number to a real Robinsons morph code should be what we aim to do when making any new modules. I believe some version of our KJV module has both (maybe current, but probably not too far back if not.) Which could easily be used to build a map. Now, having said this, Old Testament might be a bit more difficult. We ran a community project (KJV2003) to facilitate the community parsing the New Testament (well mapping each word of the KJV to a parsed Greek NT, from which we pulled the parsing). We did not do this for the Old Testament, so it might be a challenge to build a mapping from Old Testament "extended strongs" numbers to a Hebrew morphology code.<br><br>But yeah, using these extended numbers today is only confusing. We should not be trying to add them to any lexicon. We should be seeking to squash them in favor of something already ubiquitously in use for stating the morphology of Greek and Hebrew.<br><br>Hope that helps,<br><br>Troy<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On June 18, 2022 8:41:13 PM GMT+02:00, pierre amadio <amadio.pierre@gmail.com> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre dir="auto" class="k9mail">Hi there !<br><br>I am confused.<br>Morphological code are about grammar parsing, not about lexicon entry.<br><br>Looking at the Byz and KJV module:<br>diatheke -b Byz -o mn -f FMT_OSIS -k Mark 1:1<br><br>For the first word with the Byz module:<br><w lemma="strong:G746" morph="robinson:N-NSF" savlm="strong:G746">αρχη</w><br><br>I have a the following output with the KJV module:<br><w lemma="strong:G746" morph="robinson:N-NSF" savlm="strong:G746<br>lemma.TR:αρχη" src="1">The beginning</w><br><br>Same strong number, (G746), same morph code (robinson:N-NSF)<br><br>If i use xiphos (packaged in debian 11), I can see both data with both<br>modules (after I enable the right click/ module options)<br>I also see more info for the morph code and strong lexicon in the<br>preview windows when the cursor touches a code.<br><br>What precisely do you mean by "KJV seems to me to use the morphology<br>of the numbers of Strong." ?<br><br>On Sat, 18 Jun 2022 at 19:34, Fr Cyrille <fr.cyrille@tiberiade.be> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>Hello,<br>I would like to share here a problem on some module. I would like to have your opinion on the matter.<br>Rwebster and KJV seems to me to use the morphology of the numbers of Strong. However, no dictionary allows to access it. For Greek I found a solution by rewriting some modules like Byz and adding the links of the numbers of strong in Robinson's dictionary. So for Greek it is now possible to point morph="robinson:STRONGNUMBER". For Hebrew I don't have an equivalent. I tried to match the strong numbers that deal with morphology with the oshm dictionary, but it's way too complicated. I have also for test add the morphological strong numbers to the French strong dictionnary. This works with Bibletime, which looks in the strong dictionary for the corresponding number. But Xiphos is unfortunately unable to read this.<br>I would have liked to know how we could solve this problem.<br><br>I take the opportunity to call on those who develop Xiphos. The software is really a great tool, but unfortunately nobody works on it seriously anymore. I fear that one day it will be completely abandoned. That would be a big loss for Crosswire.<br><br>Thanks in advance, en Cyrille<hr>sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org<br><a href="http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel">http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel</a><br>Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page<br></blockquote><hr>sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org<br><a href="http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel">http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel</a><br>Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page</pre></blockquote></div><div style='white-space: pre-wrap'><div class='k9mail-signature'>-- <br>Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</div></div></body></html>