<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Thank you all for your answers!<br>
</p>
<p>I think if we can get the text (which is in public domain) from a
well-known bible editor, it is interesting and easier. Currently
the version Segond 1910 exists in different versions (differences
in notes/titles, maybe also in accents Ésaü/Esaü ?) and it is
interesting to know to what it corresponds. We can still share
typos upstream or/and use a patch to fix typos, and update
wikisource text.<br>
</p>
<p>If wikisource is the source, we need to know if and what paper
edition it matches exactly. If the reader can refer to a paper
edition, it is interesting. From where will come the text and
notes in wikisource? Which choices for notes/titles?<br>
</p>
<p>Personally, I found domcox's proposition interesting.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I connected to DBL and found 2 different projects :<br>
</p>
<p>- "Français Louis Segond 1910" (last archive <span>2020-12-15)</span></p>
<p>- "Louis Segond 1910 Original Corrected (Public Domain version)"
(last archive <span>2024-08-01) ("La Sainte Bible par Louis
Segond 1910. Société Biblique britannique et étrangere. Texte
historique, références corrigées en 2019." "Ce qu'il y a de
nouveau dans l'édition actuelle, ce sont surtout les parallèles.
Là où ces parallèles rendaient superflues les notes de M.
Segond, celles-ci ont été supprimées. De meme, les notes qui
exprimaient une opinion théologique, ou qui présentaient un
commentairs sur le texte, ont été laissés de cote, conformement
aux statuts de la Société, qui excluent de ses éditions de
Écritures des notes de ce genre.")<br>
</span></p>
<p>Both are published by British & Foreign Bible Society</p>
<p>But the access seem not public. As this Bible is in public
domain, I guess they will share with us if we ask.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Maybe Michael can help us to how the source of his module and how
he did it? Is it based on DBL? If so which project and what tool
do you use? from USX or USFM export?</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>For versification, I agree with domcox's remark, we can keep the
original versification. I can convert from our versification (WLC
for OT / NA for NT) to the segond versification with a script.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>If we go that way, I guess we need to do those steps:<br>
</p>
<p>1. Access DBL, export data (text, notes, titles if present) in
USX or USFM from Paratext</p>
<p>2. Convert to OSIS (better for sword and required because USX and
USFM do not support Strong's number, isn't it ?)<br>
</p>
<p>3. Add Strong's numbers (= add <w> tags on words) : for
this, I can work to match exactly the text from the previous OSIS
in our database, and develop a tool to add the last version of our
Strong's numbers on it.</p>
<p>4. Update sword module<br>
</p>
<p>The last two steps (3. and 4.) will be regularly relaunched,
because we do corrections on Strong's numbers regurlarly. It is
still a work in progress, but I think the work is already not so
not too bad.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>@Fr Cyrille : We need to exchange by email (not here) if and how
we can help you to add Strong's numbers on your néo-crampon
version. Our initial assignment tool (for Strong's numbers) has
gathered dust and requires french lemmatization and proper
versification versions with the WLC or NA to be effective. Can you
send me a mail in French, with more details (what is this new
version? is it close to other French versions other than Crampon?
what is the actual format you use? which versification?…).<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>yvand<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 05/11/2024 à 19:38, domcox a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:8734k51q7d.fsf@paka.dacorbex.fr">yvand
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:yvand.sword@gmail.com"><yvand.sword@gmail.com></a> writes:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<br>
For Segond 1910, the text is in public domain. I used mod2imp to
get the text from the FreSegond (Crosswire) module months
<br>
ago. The only changes we made are about versification. Indeed
all our texts use the same versification (based on WLC, for OT =
<br>
German in sword), so the text matches the original (hebrew WLC
or greek MT/WH) one and we can easily compare
<br>
translations.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
As lot of people still read the printed French Segond 1910 or
derivatives, I think it's very important to match the printed
<br>
versification. Regular readers generally view Bible software with
not matching versifications as second-rate software.
<br>
We have a matching Bible Segond versification, let's keep it that
way.
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">In the past, the FreLSG module had
Strong's numbers. If I am correct (see discussion "Strong
numbers for Louis Segond" in
<br>
2013/07), we do not have the authorization (but still available
in STEP) so this module has been removed or replaced by
<br>
FreSegond module (renamed ?).
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
In the past, the FreLSG had Strong's numbers. It was upgraded
later to a new version that was horrible, filled with errors
<br>
and even containing deuteros that never existed in the Segond
Bible.
<br>
<br>
This is why I made the FreSegond module, it was not an easy task.
The Segond Bible is everywhere on the Web, but it looks like
<br>
all sites use the same source, and it's not accurate.
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">The fraLSG1910eb (F10) module is a more
recent one, available in e-bible repo with headings, WoC and
Strong's numbers. It
<br>
seems to be a work in progress for Strong's numbers. They are
not available for all books. I compare Strong's numbers
<br>
affectations for the first verses of Genesis 1 (see attached
screenshot) but there are errors in this module. On the left
this
<br>
module, on the right our data
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://concordance.bible/Sg1910/Gen/1/">https://concordance.bible/Sg1910/Gen/1/</a>).
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
If I remember well, Michael have access to the DBL, so his module
is certainly based on the official Public Domain version,
<br>
edited by the Alliance Biblique Française
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lire.la-bible.net/bible/LSG/GEN.1">https://lire.la-bible.net/bible/LSG/GEN.1</a>)
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">So I contact all of you (especially actual
maintainers of Segond 1910 modules and French users) what would
be the
<br>
best way of giving our Strong's numbers for Segond 1910 in a
sword module. I don't know who is concerned or interested
<br>
that's why I send to the mailing list.
<br>
<br>
As there is already many existing Segond 1910 sword module, it
guess it would not be a good idea of creating a new one. On
<br>
one side, as our text is based from FreSegond module, it might
be a good idea of updating this module with Strong's numbers
<br>
(the only difference is versification). On the other hand, the
fraLSG1910eb module offers Strong's numbers but our data seems
<br>
more accurate and complete, so it could be interesting of
updating this module. In any case, it would be important to
submit
<br>
updates regularly for Strong's numbers.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I think the best option for this module should be:
<br>
<br>
1. Have access to the DBL version
<br>
2. Update the current CrossWire module from that source with
footnotes, comments and cross-references, keeping the original
versification
<br>
3. Add Strong's numbers
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div id="grammalecte_menu_main_button_shadow_host"
style="width: 0px; height: 0px;"></div>
</body>
</html>