[osis-core] quotes
Troy A. Griffitts
osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
Fri, 18 Oct 2002 20:25:15 -0700
> Question: Are there known cases in printed versions where the same
> translation is rendered differently?
Good question. It would definitely tell us if one publisher felt it was
their right to add continuation quotes to a book.
I still find it hard to believe if a Tozer or Lewis submitted a work to
be printed, that the publisher would find it their duty to add
continuation quotes to the work. An editor maybe, and probably approved
by the author.
> After encoding a few things, I am of the mind to recommend using milestones
> for ALL quotes other than short/simple quotes. As a result I would be
> infavor of adding back in a special milestone specifically for quotes.
> Thoughts?
I'm pretty much with you on this one. I still like our proposal to
allow a few legal empty tags to act as milestones. Last incarnation:
<q mStart="uniqueID1" />stuff<q mEnd="uniqueID1" />
<q> seems to be an easy exception to the objection of special parsing
for these. A dumb XSL could merely replace all <q> tags with " (or
consider the 'level' attribute to determine a more proper character).
I don't know where we stand regarding the ability to augment the
specification in our current chronology.
Any ideas, gents?
-Troy.
>
> A little more below.
>
> Todd
>
>>I'm impressed with your encoding, BUT....
>>
>>For this example, I would still rather use milestones. And for the code
>>I'm writing that tries to turn "'` into <q> tags, I'm tempted to ALWAYS
>>use milestones, so as not to worry about crossing other boundaries.
>>
>>Regarding my real immediate question though... I explicitly stated in my
>>first email (because I KNEW YOU SPECIFICALLY would recommend
>>segmentation :) ) that I didn't think segmentation was a good mechanism,
>>and I tried to state a very easily confused concept that SHOULD BE
>>DRASTICALLY kept separate-- in my mind, at least. To quote:
>>
>>
>> >>1) Segmentation should not be the suggested mechanism do this.
>> >>Segmentation is for CODING PROBLEMS of hierarchy and constitute ONE
>> >>LOGICAL element, when reconstructed programmatically. This is a very
>> >>different thing than actual content segmentation symbols intended for
>> >>the reader.
>
>
> I agree that the splitID should NOT be encoded for this purpose of
> identifiying paragraphs. Only because it is consistently there for other
> reasons do I suggest it be used to identify quotes that are split across
> multiple paragraphs.
>
>
>>
>>concept 1) OSIS <q> with attribute: splitID. This has absolutely NO
>>bearing on presentation/text meaning, and is ONLY used because of XML
>>limitations on hierarchy. We can attach NO OTHER MEANING TO THIS, in my
>>opinion-- and this is very important.
>>
>>It's the same problem some of the SIL guys had on first glance with
>>another scenario: "Hello", said Troy, "how are you?" They wanted to
>>know if this quote should be the same quote and use splitID. THE
>>DEFINITIVE ANSWER is NO. splitID segmentation explicates NO meaning to
>>the text; it is only a coding mechanism (and possibly temporary, at
>>that) to alleviate XML hierarchy problems.
>>
>>concept 2) a quote in the English language can be segmented.
>>
>>
>>Other than having the semantic english word 'segmented' in common, these
>>2 concepts should have NOTHING to do with each other-- and are easily
>>confused, and easily bled together.
>>
>>
>>Now, back to your email. As stated, for the most part, I like your
>>encoding of the Jeremiah text, except that I will probably not mix
>>hierarchy sub-elements when I'm working on generating these tags
>>programmatically. e.g. I won't have <verse><p></p></verse> in one
>>place, and have <p><verse></verse></p> in another. My code won't be
>>smart enough to figure out what's better.
>>
>>BUT and FINALLY, I still think it's necessary to give an AUTHOR the
>>ability of stating that he wants to use quote continuation mark at a
>>certain location.
>>
>>There is a fine line here, but I tend to think this is an _authorative_
>>style, and not just a _publishing_ style.
>>
>>Just my opinion. I'm interested to hear your rebuttals and others'
>>thoughts.
>>
>>
>> -Troy.
>>
>>
>>
>>Todd Tillinghast wrote:
>>
>>>Troy,
>>>
>>>I think that what is encoded should strictly be where the quote starts
>>>and ends. This can be accomplished either with a milestone or with a
>>><q> element. If a <q> element is used then either the <q> element OR
>>>the other overlapping elements would be segmented. The fact that a
>>>quote mark is placed at the first of a paragraph that continues a quote
>>>from a prior paragraph is a presentation issue and different styles will
>>>handle this differently.
>>>
>>>I picked out Bible.TEV:Matt.13 for test encoding for the reasons you
>>>have run into.
>>>
>>>If you go with segmentation, I personally think that it is more natural
>>>to segment the <q> element rather than the <p> and possibly other
>>>elements.
>>>
>>>The benefit of segmenting the <q> element is that the presence of a
>>>"splitID" attribute indicates that the quote has been split, which makes
>>>the job of rendering a quote mark at the start of a paragraph that
>>>continues a quote fairly simple.
>>>
>>>This is how I would encode it:
>>><div>
>>> <p>
>>> <verse osisID="Jer.2.1">Moreover the word of the LORD
>>>came to me, saying,</verse>
>>> <verse osisID="Jer.2.2">
>>> <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-A">Go and cry in the
>>>hearing of Jerusalem, saying, <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-B">Thus says the
>>>LORD:<q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-C">I remember you, The kindness of your
>>>youth, The love of your betrothal, When you went after Me in the
>>>wilderness, In a land not sown. </q>
>>> </q>
>>> </q>
>>> </verse>
>>> <verse osisID="Jer.2.3">
>>> <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-A">
>>> <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-B">
>>> <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-C">Israel
>>>[was] holiness to the LORD, The firstfruits of His increase. All that
>>>devour him will offend; Disaster will come upon them,</q>
>>> <!--True Close Q-Jer.2.2-C
>>>-->says the LORD.</q>
>>> <!-- True Close Q-Jer.2.2-B -->
>>> </q>
>>> <!--NO True Close Q-Jer.2.2-A -->
>>> </verse>
>>> </p>
>>> <p>
>>> <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.2-A">
>>> <verse osisID="Jer.2.4">Hear the word of the
>>>LORD, O house of Jacob and all the families of the house of
>>>Israel.</verse>
>>> <verse osisID="Jer.2.5">Thus says the LORD:<q
>>>splitID="Q-Jer.2.5-A">What injustice have your fathers found in Me, That
>>>they have gone far from Me, Have followed idols, And have become
>>>idolaters?</q>
>>> </verse>
>>> <q splitID="Q-Jer.2.5-A">
>>> <verse osisID="Jer.2.6">Neither did they
>>>say,<q>
>>> <!-- No need for a split
>>>here --> Where [is] the LORD, Who brought us up out of the land of
>>>Egypt, Who led us through the wilderness, Through a land of deserts and
>>>pits, Through a land of drought and the shadow of death, Through a land
>>>that no one crossed And where no one dwelt?</q>
>>> </verse>
>>> <verse osisID="Jer.2.7">I brought you
>>>into a bountiful country, To eat its fruit and its goodness. But when
>>>you entered, you defiled My land And made My heritage an
>>>abomination.</verse>
>>> <verse osisID="Jer.2.8">The priests did
>>>not say,<q>Where [is] the LORD?</q>And those who handle the law did not
>>>know Me; The rulers also transgressed against Me; The prophets
>>>prophesied by Baal, And walked after [things that] do not
>>>profit.</verse>
>>> <verse osisID="Jer.2.9">
>>> <!--****conflict here**** no
>>>ending "-->
>>> </verse>
>>> </q>
>>> <!-- True Close of Q-Jer.2.5-A -->
>>> </q>
>>> <!-- True Close of Q-Jer.2.2-A -->
>>> </p>
>>></div>
>>>Not sure if I got the part near Jer.2.9 right since that is where you
>>>left off and I don't have a printed NKJV. Hopefully you get the idea.
>>>
>>>Also note that I started the split quote "Q-Jer.2.5-A" inside the
>>><verse> element Jer.2.5 but then had the continuation of the <q> element
>>>"Q-Jer.2.5-A" contain the <verse> elements for Jer.2.6, Jer.2.7, Jer.2.8
>>>and Jer.2.9. This leaves "Q-Jer.2.5-A" split into only two pieces but
>>>also has it contained within and containing <verse> elements that are
>>>parallel.
>>>
>>>The placement of the continuation quote mark when rendering would be
>>>identified by a <q> that is split prior to the first "text" in the
>>>paragraph.
>>>
>>>The other option is to use milestones. I am not really opposed to using
>>>milestones for quotes, especially for cases like this. But I don't
>>>think there is any need for <q type="continuation"> since there will
>>>MUST already be the information provided by "splitID" attributes.
>>>
>>>What do you think?
>>>
>>>Todd
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hey guys. Got some quote questions for you all. Again, I go to
>>>>extremely difficult problems in the minor prophets. Please see after
>>>>example for my immediate question.
>>>>
>>>>Here's an excerpt from the NKJV, Jer 2:1-. I've tried to 'codify' the
>>>>quotes and indentation to help see the hierarchy:
>>>>
>>>>_________________________
>>>>
>>>>1. Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 2.
>>>>"
>>>> Go and cry in the hearing of Jerusalem, saying,
>>>> '
>>>> Thus says the LORD:
>>>> "
>>>> I remember you, The kindness of your youth, The love of your
>>>> betrothal, When you went after Me in the wilderness, In a
>>>> land not sown. 3. Israel [was] holiness to the LORD, The
>>>> firstfruits of His increase. All that devour him will
>>>> offend; Disaster will come upon them,
>>>> "
>>>> says the LORD.
>>>> '
>>>>"
>>>>4. Hear the word of the LORD, O house of Jacob and all the
>>>>families of the house of Israel. 5. Thus says the LORD:
>>>>"
>>>> What injustice have your fathers found in Me, That they have gone
>>>> far from Me, Have followed idols, And have become idolaters?
>>>> 6. Neither did they say,
>>>> '
>>>> Where [is] the LORD, Who brought us up out of the land of Egypt,
>>>> Who led us through the wilderness, Through a land of deserts
>>>> and pits, Through a land of drought and the shadow of death,
>>>> Through a land that no one crossed And where no one dwelt?
>>>> '
>>>> 7. I brought you into a bountiful country, To eat its fruit
>>>> and its goodness. But when you entered, you defiled My land
>>>> And made My heritage an abomination. 8. The priests did not say,
>>>> '
>>>> Where [is] the LORD?
>>>> '
>>>> And those who handle the law did not know Me; The rulers
>>>> also transgressed against Me; The prophets prophesied
>>>> by Baal, And walked after [things that] do not profit.
>>>> 9.
>>>><****conflict here**** no ending ">
>>>>"
>>>> Therefore I will yet bring charges against you,
>>>>"
>>>>says the LORD,...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_________________________
>>>>
>>>>Verse 9 has a 'continuation quote' that started in verse 5. I think
>>>
>>>the
>>>
>>>
>>>>NKJV does this when a new paragraph begins and the quote spans the
>>>>paragraph, eg.
>>>>
>>>>This is a long quote, "Hello this is my first paragraph.
>>>>"This is my second paragraph."
>>>>
>>>>Here is another example from John 7:21:
>>>>_________________________
>>>>
>>>>21. Jesus answered and said to them, "I did one work, and you all
>>>
>>>marvel.
>>>
>>>
>>>>22. "Moses therefore gave you circumcision (not that it is from Moses,
>>>>but from the fathers), and you circumcise a man on the Sabbath.
>>>>23. "If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the law of
>>>>Moses should not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made a man
>>>>completely well on the Sabbath?
>>>>24. "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous
>>>>judgment."
>>>>_________________________
>>>>
>>>>the quote starts in 21, and continues thru 24. There are
>>>
>>>'continuation
>>>
>>>
>>>>quotes' starting verses 22, 23, and 24.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>HOW IN THE WORLD SHOULD WE MARK THESE UP?
>>>>
>>>>My thoughts:
>>>>
>>>>1) Segmentation should not be the suggested mechanism do this.
>>>>Segmentation is for CODING PROBLEMS of hierarchy and constitute ONE
>>>>LOGICAL element, when reconstructed programmatically. This is a very
>>>>different thing that actual content segmentation symbols intended for
>>>>the reader.
>>>>
>>>>2) suggestion: <q type="continuation" />
>>>>
>>>>3) alternate suggestion: no markup at all. Just remove the
>>>
>>>continuation
>>>
>>>
>>>>quotes and let the renderer decide that it needs to insert the
>>>>appropriate "'` or whatever/whenever the renderer feels the need to
>>>
>>>show
>>>
>>>
>>>>continuation quotes.
>>>>
>>>>I think enabling authors to mark these up in text is best, so I prefer
>>>>something like the suggestion in 2.
>>>>
>>>>Thoughts?
>>>> -Troy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>