[osis-core] scripCom

[Troy A. Griffitts]

> That seems reasonable; what are the types that you know of?
> 
> So far we've distinguished
> 
> a) Identifying a part of the document as 'being' a certain passage
> 
> b) a cross-reference to a given passage

I think we need to decide (if we haven't yet), that <verse> is always: I 
am this, and <reference> is always cf. some verse (or other container 
based on our elaborate schemes of stuff like mat.1.1+char(5), mat.1.1, 
mat.1, mat)

Is it clear that we are not reserving these "I'm this" / "cf. That" 
elements for Bibles.  Do we-- and have we stated clearly that we-- 
intend for them to be used in other contexts besides Scripture?


> It seems we need to add at least
> 
> c) being commentary about a given passage

The reason I bring this up, is that we exported, e.g. Matthew Henry's 
verse by verse commentary just like a Bible, marking "I'm this" with 
<verse> tags.

Not sure if I like this or not, but I *do* like the idea of have the 
*same* elements for both a) and b) that Steve mentioned above.  It 
leaves one place to write code against for such operations.

So, is there a clear distinction for a 3rd, c), type?  Or might our "I'm 
this" tag be used with a specific type for all kinds of documents:

<verse verseID="markup language">
Main Entry: markup language
Function: noun
Date: 1980
: a system (as HTML or SGML) for marking or tagging a document that 
indicates its logical structure (as paragraphs) and gives instructions 
for its layout on the page for electronic transmission and display
</verse>


Does that seem strange?  Calling it verse seems a little strange to me.
Did we decide that it's ok to allow spaces in verseID?