<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/23/24 10:47, Troy A. Griffitts
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:41af9402-021e-4145-a942-843e23f71955@crosswire.org">It
is dependent on whether or not a module has the
StrongsPadding=true in its .conf file. All Strongs-keyed
dictionaries should have this entry.
</blockquote>
<br>
<font face="FreeSerif">Well, now, that's an educational moment.
Never heard of StrongsPadding before. Apparently neither has much
of anyone else.<br>
</font><font face="monospace"><br>
$ pwd<br>
/home/karl/.sword/mods.d<br>
$ ls | wc -l<br>
890<br>
$ grep StrongsPadding= *<br>
bosworthtoller.conf:StrongsPadding=false<br>
eusebian.conf:StrongsPadding=false<br>
mywsc.conf:StrongsPadding=false<br>
zhenglish.conf:StrongsPadding=false</font><font face="FreeSerif"><br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.crosswire.org/DevTools:conf_Files#StrongsPadding">https://wiki.crosswire.org/DevTools:conf_Files#StrongsPadding</a><br>
</font>
<blockquote><font face="FreeSerif">StrongsPadding</font><br>
<font face="FreeSerif">At the heart of our lexicon/dictionary
drivers, we have some old logic which tries to detect if a key
value is a Strong's number, and if so, then pad it with leading
zeros accordingly. To support this logic, the recognition has
recently been added for an optional new .conf entry for
lexicon/dictionary modules:</font><br>
<br>
<font face="FreeSerif">StrongsPadding=true|false</font><br>
</blockquote>
<font face="FreeSerif">How "recent" is this addition? Should other
modules (Bibles, commentaries) have it, so as to indicate how its
Strongs markup should be handled?<br>
<br>
On its face, this is ambiguous: Is StrongsPadding=true an
indication that the module <i>has</i> padding already, or that it
<i>needs</i> padding to be provided?<br>
</font>
</body>
</html>