[osis-users] OSIS cross-reference questions
Markku Pihlaja
markku.pihlaja at sempre.fi
Wed Nov 21 09:33:44 MST 2012
Well, no replies to my previous message.
My explanations might have been too long for anyone to take the effort of
reading - sorry about that. So now I'll try reducing and simplyfying the
questions that I still need an answer for. Read further to previous
conversations if you need more details.
------------------------------------------------------------
*1)* How do I make a difference between a list of three separate
crossreferences and a single compound crossreference that consists of three
separate verses (or even ranges)?
Example:
Deut. 32:15; Deut. 32:17; Deut. 32:22–26
vs.
Deut. 32:15,17,22–26
I emphasize that the second example is just a single reference to a
non-contiguous set of verses, and can also be one of several separate
references on a list like the first example.
------------------------------------------------------------
*2)* Is listing multiple individual verses separated by a space really
allowed in *a)* osisIDs *b)* osisRefs?
I tried parsing the OSIS schema for osisIDRegex and osisRefRegex but
couldn't find anything that would allow this - probably missed just the
crucial character somewhere. The Durusau manual does give an example about *
a)* under "15.4. Grouping". But the manual says that "a single osisRef
cannot identify a discontiguous range of a work", so the answer to *b)* is
probably "no" and the latter of the two examples below incorrect?
Example:
<note type="crossReference" osisID="*Deut.32.15 Deut.32.17*">
<reference osisRef="*Deut.32.15 Deut.32.17*">
------------------------------------------------------------
*3)* If the answer to 2a) is yes, what is allowed with a compound ID like
that? Specifically, can I use sub-identifiers?
If I name a note with such a grouped osisID, can I append !crossReference
to it - and where should I place it? After an extra space after the last
verse listed or connected to the las verse (in which case it looks like it
only applies to that verse)?
Example:
<note type="crossReference" osisID="*Deut.32.15 Deut.32.17 !crossReference*
">
or
<note type="crossReference" osisID="*Deut.32.15 Deut.32.17!crossReference*">
or something else?
Merely <note type="crossReference" osisID="*Deut.32.15!crossReference*"> won't
do because I need to make a difference between a note attached to just
verse 15 and to verses 15 and 17 together. And I do need to refer to the
very note instead of the verses, that's why I need that sub-identifier.
------------------------------------------------------------
*4)* If the answer to 2b) is yes, what is allowed in that compound ref?
Specifically, are ranges allowed in such compound refs?
Example:
<reference osisRef="*Deut.32.15 Deut.32.17 **Deut.32.22-Deut.32.26*">
I guess this goes back to question 1) especially if 2b) was wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------
*5)* If 2b (and thus also 4) is wrong, how do I make a cross-reference to a
*note* whose *source* passage consists of incontiguous verses? Also, since
annotateRef takes an osisRef value, how can I indicate an incontiguous
source in that?
Example, apparently with at least an invalid osisRef:
<note type="crossReference" osisID="*Deut.32.15 Deut.32.17 !crossReference*
">
...
<reference osisRef="*Deut.32.15 Deut.32.17 !crossReference*">Deut.
32.15,17</reference>
------------------------------------------------------------
*6) *Is it possible to have a reference's osisRef with a sub-identifier
without a corresponding osisID having that (or any) sub-identifier?
*
*
Example:
<verse osisID="*Deut.32.15*" sID="Deut.32.15" />Jeshurun grew fat and
kicked; filled with food, he became heavy and sleek. He abandoned the God
who made him and rejected the Rock his Savior.<verse eID="Deut.32.15" />
...
<reference osisRef="*Deut.32.15!part2*">
------------------------------------------------------------
Complicated questions, I hope you have some answers or at least workarounds!
Markku
2012/11/19 Markku Pihlaja <markku.pihlaja at sempre.fi>
> Thanks DM,
>
> (Others are also welcome to share their views! And also to check the one
> new question at the end, after the second "-----------" marker)
>
> That didn't quite solve my problem. You say I shouldn't nest references.
> But I do need some way of making a difference between a compound reference
> and a list of separate references. An example:
>
> In Gen. 46:12, we have three references:
> Gen. 38:7,10; Num. 26:19-21; 1. Chr. 4:1
>
> The first one, to Gen., is indeed just one reference even though it refers
> to separate verses. As far as I can figure out, an unnested note wouldn't
> be able to tell whether Gen.38.7 and Gen.38.10 are parts of the same
> reference or two independent references:
> <note type="crossreference">
> <reference osisRef="Gen.38.7">Gen. 38:7</reference>,
> <reference osisRef="Gen.38.10">10</reference>;
> <reference osisRef="Num. 26:19-21">Num. 26:19-21</reference>;
> <reference osisRef="1Chr.4.1">1. Chr. 4:1</reference>
> </note>
>
> Of course, to a human those first two refs would probably look like one
> reference, but the computer needs to rely solely on the markup and not
> what's between.
>
> If, on the other hand, I list that as three subsequent notes, the
> semicolons wouldn't be embedded in any tags and thus would be rendered even
> when reference notes should be hidden.
>
> <note type="crossreference">
> <reference osisRef="Gen.38.7">Gen. 38:7</reference>,
> <reference osisRef="Gen.38.10">10</reference>
> </note>
> ;
> <note type="crossreference">
> <reference osisRef="Num. 26:19-21">Num. 26:19-21</reference>
> </note>
> ;
> <note type="crossreference">
> <reference osisRef="1Chr.4.1">1. Chr. 4:1</reference>
> </note>
>
> I guess it is also true what you wrote about note tags: they represent the
> marker(s) in the text (even though most of our printed Finnish Bibles don't
> include markers within the text; the notes are listed after certain
> passages with references to the position of the note instead). Also this
> would imply that I shouldn't use the later example with three subsequent
> notes.
>
>
> You mentioned one more approach, listing all parts of the compound
> reference in one osisRef. That would seem to work somehow:
>
> <note type="crossreference">
> <reference osisRef="Gen.38.7 Gen.38.10">Gen. 38:7,10</reference>;
> <reference osisRef="Num. 26:19-21">Num. 26:19-21</reference>;
> <reference osisRef="1Chr.4.1">1. Chr. 4:1</reference>
> </note>
>
> This osisRef / osisID style, however, is missing from Durusau's User
> Manual. There is section "15.4 Grouping" that does give an example of such
> notation with osisIDs, but "Appendix J - osisIDs: Construction Rules"
> doesn't say anything about this. And I've found nothing whatsoever about
> osisRefs like this. So is this certainly valid markup?
>
> Also, assuming "Gen.38.7 Gen.38.10" would be a valid osisRef, would also
> for example "Gen.38.7 Gen.38.10-Gen.38.12" be? We also have a few
> compound references consisting of separate verses AND one or more ranges.
>
> -----------
>
> As for my question number 3) - the subdivision of a referenced verse - I
> tried to explain that there is no automatic or even easy manual way of
> determining where each subdivision of the verse begins. We would need a
> Bible content expert to do that, and we don't have one for this project.
>
> So referring to a fine-grained position of a verse is no option since we
> don't know where each exact position would be.
>
> I'll refine my question:
> Is there any way of determining a "vague" division of a verse? For
> example, does the extension part of an osisRef always need to have a
> corresponding osisID somewhere? Or could we have a verse like this:
> <verse osisID="Xxx.2.14" sID=.... />
> Some text here. Some more text here. Even some more text here. And more
> and more text.
> <verse eID="... />
>
> and then have a reference like this:
> <reference osisRef="Xxx.2.14!c">Xxx 2:14</reference>
> with just the osisID "Xxx.2.14" declared but not "Xxx.2.14!c"?
>
> I know this is vague, but so is our current notation, and I'm trying to
> find some means of including the info in the current notation also in the
> markup. My plan B would then be to just encode all the references to the
> whole verse and let only the | separators indicate to the reader that the
> references point to different parts of the verse, just as in the printed
> versions now.
>
>
> -----------
>
> And now for one new somewhat related question.
>
> We also have something that could be called indirect references. Our
> notation
> Gen. 24:7+
> tells us that this reference doesn't refer to Gen. 24:7 itself, but it
> shares the references listed for that verse instead. For example, this Gen.
> 24:7 has references:
> <note osisID="Gen.24.7!crossReference">
> <reference osisRef="Gen.50.24">Gen. 50:24</reference>;
> <reference osisRef="Deut.1.8">Deut. 1:8</reference>;
> <reference osisRef="Josh.1.6">Josh. 1:6</reference>;
> <reference osisRef="Judg.2.1">Judg.2:1</reference>
> </note>
>
> Now when another verse lists "Gen. 24:7+" as its reference, it means that
> this reference list should be used as the reference list for this verse,
> too. Unfortunately replacing the plus notation with the complete list isn't
> an option here - apparently the fact that these verses share the same
> references is of importance itself.
>
> In normal cases, this would probably be rather simple: refer to the
> note in Gen. 24:7 with
> <reference osisRef="Gen.24.7!crossReference" ...>Gen. 24:7+</reference>.
>
> But things get tricky when the referred verse in the plus notation is more
> than a single verse. We have notations like
> "Deut. 4:41,43+". or "Gen. 15:19–21+".
>
> We might be able to cope with the first one, assuming the "Grouping"
> notation discussed earlier is valid. But is it ok to add the sub-identifier
> "!crossReference" to an ID like this: "Deut.4.41 Deut.4.43", and where do
> I add it?
>
> But it gets worse with the latter notation, since ranges aren't allowed in
> osisIDs - and thus I also can't create an osisRef "
> Gen.15.19-Gen.15.21!crossReference". Or that osisRef might still be
> valid, but at least the corresponding osisID wouldn't, and thus that
> reference wouldn't make sense.
>
> One solution would obviously be to use the osisID of just the first verse
> - that would mean "Deut.4.41!crossReference" or "Gen.15.19!crossReference"
> in my examples. But that is not possible since there might already be
> references for that verse alone. Also, omitting the other verses from the
> ID would mean that nothing at all in the markup would tell that this note
> is related to more than one verse:
> <note osisid="Gen.15.19!crossReference">
> <reference osisRef="Exod.3.8">Exod. 3:8</reference>
> </note>
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
> Phew, these things are complicated to explain in an understandable
> manner... And impossible to do it with only a few short lines.
>
> Once again, thanks in advance to those who take the effort of reading all
> this!
>
> Markku
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2012/11/14 DM Smith <dmsmith at crosswire.org>
>
>>
>> On Nov 14, 2012, at 8:54 AM, Markku Pihlaja <markku.pihlaja at sempre.fi>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'll also need to return to some questions that already got answered ages
>> ago - halfway to meet my final needs, as it now turned out.
>>
>>
>> 2012/4/26 David Troidl <DavidTroidl at aol.com>
>>>
>>> 1)
>>>> How should I encode cross-references to non-contiguous verse ranges?
>>>> For example, I have this reference (in our standard notation): Matt.
>>>> 27:17,22. This is formally just one reference to verses 17 and 22, not two
>>>> separate references. OSIS requires that "a single osisRef cannot identify a
>>>> discontiguous range of a work". So how should this be done? Making one note
>>>> that contains two references might be a step towards what I want, but there
>>>> would still be two separate references.
>>>>
>>> Here is the way to encode discontiguous references:
>>> <note type="crossReference"><reference osisRef="Matt.27.17">Matt.
>>> 27:17</reference>, <reference osisRef="Matt.27.22">22</reference></note>
>>>
>>
>> So, when I have a list of separate references, some of which are
>> non-contiguous ones such as above, should I create a nested note to contain
>> the different notes?
>>
>> For example, if I have the following three references for one verse:
>> Matt. 27:17,22 ; 2. Sam. 7:16; Matt. 9:27
>>
>> should that be coded as:
>>
>> <note type="crossreference">
>> <note type="crossreference">
>> <reference osisRef="Matt.27.17">Matt. 27:17</reference>,
>> <reference osisRef="Matt.27.22">22</reference>
>> </note>;
>> <note type="crossreference">
>> <reference osisRef="2Sam.7.16">2. Sam. 7:16</reference>
>> </note>;
>> <note type="crossreference">
>> <reference osisRef="Matt.9.27">Matt. 9:27</reference>
>> </note>
>> </note>
>>
>>
>> No. Don't nest.
>> You can also use references such as <reference osisRef="Matt.27.17
>> Matt.27.22 2Sam.7.16 Matt.9.27">Matt 27:17,22; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt
>> 9:27</reference>.
>> Note that some systems (e.g. SWORD Project) cannot handle this.
>> And having 4 refs is better.
>>
>>
>> Putting all the <reference>'s within just one <note> container would to
>> me mean one reference to extremely non-contiguous verses. And if I omit the
>> outer <note> tags, then the semicolon separators between the different
>> notes would fall outside any note and be rendered even when notes are
>> hidden.
>>
>> If that suggestion was right, what should we do in simpler cases where
>> there is a group of contiguous references?Should I still enclose them in a
>> second level of <note>'s for consistency, or would it be ok to use only one
>> level like this (assuming here that there is no 27:22 in the first
>> reference):
>>
>> <note type="crossreference">
>> <reference osisRef="Matt.27.17">Matt. 27:17</reference>;
>> <reference osisRef="2Sam.7.16">2. Sam. 7:16</reference>;
>> <reference osisRef="Matt.9.27">Matt. 9:27</reference>
>> </note>
>>
>>
>> Just one level. Just like this.
>>
>>
>>
>> 3)
>>>> Our cross-references are currently listed on a verse-by-verse basis in
>>>> a separate file. Each verse might have a number of references, most of them
>>>> separated by a semi-colon. However, in some cases the separator is the
>>>> vertical line character, | (or the pipe sign). This indicates a fine
>>>> grained division of the source verse. That's *source*, not target. For
>>>> example,
>>>> Luuk. 2:4-7 ¦ Dan. 1:20
>>>> would say that the beginning of the referring verse refers to Luke
>>>> 2:4-7, and the end to Daniel 1:20. There can be up to 4 divisions like this
>>>> in one verse. However, there is no automatic way of determining what the
>>>> exact division of the source verse is. In fact, in some cases even I can't
>>>> read the verse and tell the division without reading the referenced verses
>>>> first.
>>>>
>>>> This means that in any case I'll probably need to leave the OSIS coding
>>>> vague in this respect. My question here: is there a way to somehow indicate
>>>> the existence of this division within the tags, or is the only way to
>>>> continue marking it like it was done until now, like this:
>>>> <reference section1a.... />; <reference section1b.... /> | <reference
>>>> section2.... /> | <reference section3a.... />; <reference section3b.... />
>>>>
>>>> Could that be done by using osisID's like
>>>> Matt.1.1!crossReference.section1.a
>>>> Matt.1.1!crossReference.section1.b etc.
>>>> or is there a better way?
>>>>
>>> I'm not exactly clear what you are asking here. If you want to mark
>>> up the notes, without changing the markup of the Bible text, you could use
>>> word numbers within the verse, to indicate where the note applies.
>>>
>>
>> And I'm not quite clear if I got your point :).
>> Let me give you a quite precise example.
>>
>> This is Acts 3:13:
>> "The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has
>> glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over to be killed, and you
>> disowned him before Pilate, though he had decided to let him go."
>>
>> For that verse, we have three different references which are marked like
>> this:
>> Exod. 3:6 | Isa. 52:13 | Luke 23:16
>> The | separators (as opposed to semicolons that are normally used as
>> separators in reference lists) indicate that the Exodus reference is
>> related to the beginning of our verse, the Isaiah reference to the middle
>> part and the Luke reference to the end.
>>
>> As you can see, even though the reference list applies that there are
>> three sections in the verse, there is no automatic way of determining what
>> exactly are "the beginning", "the middle" and "the end", or sections 1, 2
>> and 3 of that verse. In some cases it is even unclear after you've
>> carefully read the verse and the references and tried to use common
>> sense based on the contents to manually figure out what those sections are.
>> So the aim of placing the reference notes separately in the text exactly
>> where they should appear is rather impossible.
>>
>> My question is: is there a way of indicating in a reference itself that
>> the source of the reference is some sub-part of the verse? In this way,
>> applications might be able to e.g. show an extra tag "from middle of verse"
>> or something like that. Could we use subdivided osisID's for this purpose,
>> like this:
>>
>> <note type="cross-reference">
>> <reference osisID="Acts.3.13!crossReference.1"
>> osisRef="Exod.3.6">Exod. 3:6</reference> |
>>
>> <reference osisID="Acts.3.13.crossreference.2" osisRef="Isa.52.13">Isa.
>> 52:13</reference> |
>>
>> <reference osisID="Acts.3.13.crossreference.3" osisRef="Luke.23.16">Luke
>> 23:16</reference>
>> </note>
>>
>> and with even further fine-tuning if there were for example two
>> references before the first "|":
>> osisID="Acts.3.13!crossReference.1.a" and
>> osisID="Acts.3.13!crossReference.1.b" ?
>>
>>
>> From memory, there is a grain part of the osisID/osisRef that can be used
>> to indicate the code points (think characters) that comprise the sub-part.
>> It is used like SUBSTR in many programming languages.
>>
>> However, If you are going to go to that much trouble then I'd suggest
>> that you split the note into various parts and put them into the proper
>> locations in the file.
>>
>> The basic idea of the <note> element is that it appears in the source at
>> the position that you want the marker(s). If you want one marker, then you
>> have one note. If you want 3 then you have 3.
>>
>> Hope this helps,
>> DM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for your patience, these are rather hard to explain exactly and
>> understandably but in short :).
>>
>> Markku
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> osis-users mailing list
>> osis-users at crosswire.org
>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/osis-users
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> osis-users mailing list
>> osis-users at crosswire.org
>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/osis-users
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/osis-users/attachments/20121121/a0b63ee7/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the osis-users
mailing list