From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 01:14:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 18:14:36 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Happy New Year Message-ID: <3A4FD9FC.6A2E8654@crosswire.org> May God be the reason we breath this year! Wishing you all a great, renewed joy in serving Him and that the endless depths of His patience and grace with us would remind you every second that you have a God Who cares about your every breath. In Jesus Christ, -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 03:18:52 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (James Gross) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 03:18:52 Subject: [sword-devel] Happy New Year Message-ID:

Amen.

In Christ's Service,

Jim



 


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 06:03:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Leon Brooks) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 14:03:42 +0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters References: Message-ID: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> Chris Little wrote: >> some of our leverage as being a free, non-commercial and OPEN SOURCE >> software package would be taken away. > I don't think being Open Source is much of a selling point to publishers. No, but it does illustrate that in principle we are not chest-hugging greedy and paranoid about things. > Generally, they're afraid of someone cracking the software and > stealing their stuff. There's some logic to it, since someone with an > unlocked module could essentially do anything with that module, like print, > publish online, etc. Amusingly, I'd say we still have much stronger > protection than most closed-source, even commercial products. With SWORD, > you definitely have to have a decrypt key for every query. Logos, on the > other hand, just keeps track of which books you have unlocked and stores it > in a file. In other words, nothing is even encrypted, so you can pretty > easily share your unlock cache file or crack the program itself to ignore > the unlock checks. The advantage here is not ``open source'' but ``better methods,'' or (in this case at least) better engineering. Really, any work done for Christ should be both free and open source regardless, caveat that the workers concerned must find a way to sustain themselves. Many ``Christian'' publishers are worrying too much about staying in business and not enough about what their business really is. While there is a definite duty of care involved, if God be for a publisher, who can be against them? Publishers should have the purity and effectiveness of the works that they produce first in mind, the dollars second (and the spread of the gospel zeroeth: it should not so much be something to be borne in mind as a basic assumption, part of the personality of the company). These days, at least, the only way to make serious money out of authoring something is to write a thick ``Mills-and-Boone'' romance book and sell fifty million of them in the first month. The money is made from the sale of physical books, not the information in them: the information is the reason for the sale, but the book is what actually gets sold; copyright exists to prevent others from making duplicates of the original physical book. The digital realm is a completely different universe, in that duplication costs essentially zero. If I buy a 20GB hard disk for $OZ200.00, my storage is worth $10.00/GB, or 1c/MB. My current collection of SWORD texts cost me about 10c to duplicate; if I'd paid top dollar for the data (it was free), the transport cost would be about $1.50. This compares favourably with about 2000cc (about 3kg) of paper which had to be typeset, printed and bound, then transported, stored, sorted, transported again (repeat maybe twice more), costing about $OZ60.00 at bare-bones prices, probably about double that in reality. Not only that, I can search and cross-reference it all pretty much instantly. Traditional media (ie paper) were protected to some degree from individuals copying them by the difficulty and expense of duplicating the physical medium. This protection is evapourating rapidly. Tapes and videotapes were the leading edge of the wedge, but now with digital storage at unprecedentedly low prices and set to balloon even more, a revolution of profound implications, similar in magnitude to the invention of the printing press, is upon us. [ BTW, is this sounding pontifical enough? :-) ] The different behaviour of the publishing medium requires a different profitability model, a different view of issues like copyright, royalties, and publishing costs. Before printing, money was made in doing the actual transcription; only after presses became common did issues like copyright become significant. Open Source pushes the operating model even further. What concepts will wither and die, and what will blossom in its path? One profitability method is to use electronic media as a leader back to traditional media: ``if you like reading this text on line, have you considered owning an attractively bound printed copy with that traditional feel, clear print, lasting value and batteryless portable operation?'' This, I believe, has a limited future. Either way, the purpose of Christian literature, espcially the Word of God, should be primarily to get itself read and used. If we can find a way to make this happen, hopefully commensurate with the profitability of whatever the publishing companies become, I'm sure God will be pleased. (-: -- Do you remember when you only had to pay for windows when *you* broke them? -- Noel Maddy From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 13:07:00 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (sword-devel@crosswire.org) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 08:07:00 EST Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters Message-ID: Chris, Thank yo so much for telling us how to crack LOGOS. :) Mark From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 17:04:24 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 18:04:24 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters References: Message-ID: <004a01c07414$e7b52430$0101a8c0@gandalf> Interesting... A few weeks ago (14-12-00) I emailed the newsgroep of the online bible (news.onlinebible.org) asking if there was going to be an open source version of the OLB. A kind person pointed me in the right direction: to the SWORD website. A few days later I received a long email from the dutch distributor of the OLB stating he strongly disagreed the SWORD project because (quote) "...their website contains mostly illegal software for distributing copyrighted bible texts..." (quote") "...cannot agree with this anarchistic behaviour..." I think he is mis-understanding the target of the SWORD project: to spread the bible, make it be read by as many people as possible. As far as I can see there is nothing wrong with using the OLB texts, when I have bought the CD-rom. OLB gets paid, I use the sword software to read the bible, everybody happy ??? Like chris said, I think the publishers fear for 'hackers stealing texts' or something. Anyway, is there really anyone who DOES own the bible? Regards, Peter Snoek ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Little" To: "SWORD Devel List" Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 1:10 AM Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters > I got the following from Rick Meyers, who writes e-Sword. > > >> Quote >> > Chris, we should work together to get the various publishers to allow > "their" resources made available for both of "our" products. Hopefully for > free! > > In His service, > > Rick Meyers > rick@e-sword.net > << End Quote << > > He doesn't appear to be that interested in moving to the Sword API from his > own proprietary format, but he's interested in collaborating on the > publisher front. Does this sound wise to the rest of you? If so, Jonathan > (I figure this is your area), could you contact him, fill him in on your > work so far, and see how he can help. > > If we want to extend this further, I believe we could convince the people at > TOLBSS to join us also in asking publishers for permission to freely > distribute texts they own. The up side is that we would get more help > dealing with publishers. The down side is that the publishers may get the > impression that they would be giving too much away by granting this sort of > permission to multiple projects at once. > > Some good news also: I got permission from Larry Nelson for us to distribute > all his works, except those which require royalty payments to others. That > means we can distribute the JPS translation (which has been down for a month > or so, since I found out we didn't have permission to distribute it), the > Rotherham translation (in progress), and the Murdock translation (still > being worked on by him). Larry is also going to contact me with some > information about the Brenton, Lamsa, and Phillips translations, regarding > their necessary royalty payments. We can judge from that information > whether we want to pursue distributing them. The payments may be reasonable > enough to allow us to just pay for them ourselves or we might consider > something like selling unlock codes through PayPal. > > --Chris > > > > > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 19:37:35 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 11:37:35 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Thank yo so much for telling us how to crack LOGOS. :) I told you Logos was crack-able, not HOW to crack it. :) There's much better information on how their security model works, now and in the future, on the bible-linux egroup. It has some good ideas from Bob about varying degrees of security to keep publishers happy. Some of them might not make users completely happy (like web-based modules that you pay for but never really get to download in whole) but may open publishers up to releasing new & important texts that they otherwise wouldn't. There's still no explanation of how to crack Logos there, so don't go there for that reason, but bible-linux is where I got most of my info about Logos' security. -Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 21:56:20 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 13:56:20 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters In-Reply-To: <004a01c07414$e7b52430$0101a8c0@gandalf> Message-ID: > A few weeks ago (14-12-00) I emailed the newsgroep of the online bible > (news.onlinebible.org) asking if there was going to be an open source > version of the OLB. Avoid their newsgroup. OLB has given no support through their bulletin board/newsgroup since they've existed. The users finally got fed up with OLB's official bulletin board and formed their own. The useful (and active) OLB-related forum is: http://pub23.bravenet.com/forum/show.asp?usernum=1920683510 . It's run by TOLBSS, the free OLB module site, unaffiliated with Larry Pierce. > A few days later I received a long email from the dutch distributor > of the OLB stating he strongly disagreed the SWORD project because > > (quote) "...their website contains mostly illegal software for > distributing > copyrighted bible texts..." > (quote") "...cannot agree with this anarchistic behaviour..." Woohoo! That's a lot of FUD. Peter F van der Schelde must be afraid we're going to cut into his profit margin or something. If they're so afraid of our "anarchistic behaviour" I guess I'd better rethink helping them out on any projects in the future. I wouldn't want to taint their project. :) Seriously, though, if anyone knows of any unencrypted, copyrighted modules that are posted, please mention it so that we can encrypt them and contact the owner for permission. He may just have seen the encrypted texts and assumed we were giving them out for free. And I have no idea what he means by "illegal software" when referring to the OLB converter. It's not as if it even required any reverse engineering for Troy to write it. It just reads a RTF file that OLB exports as one of its features. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 23:11:03 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (David Burry) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 15:11:03 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters In-Reply-To: <004a01c07414$e7b52430$0101a8c0@gandalf> References: Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20010101150250.021f7c00@beaver> It's only natural that an open source project would attract more hoodlums bent on "anarchistic behaviour" than a closed source one. But one should look to the project leads as to whether the project can categorically be called such, not any blithering idiot (like myself ;o) ) who posts. And one should more carefully examine a web site before jumping to conclusions. Dave P.S. Eudora's giving this message a rating of two red hot chilli peppers ;o) At 06:04 PM 1/1/2001 +0100, Peter Snoek wrote: >A few days later I received a long email from the dutch distributor >of the OLB stating he strongly disagreed the SWORD project because > >(quote) "...their website contains mostly illegal software for distributing >copyrighted bible texts..." >(quote") "...cannot agree with this anarchistic behaviour..." From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 02:33:43 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 18:33:43 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters References: <5.0.0.25.0.20010101150250.021f7c00@beaver> Message-ID: <000b01c07464$a9c0a460$638c2d3f@family> Dear Everyone, So I am guessing that the conclusion of this discussion is?!?... Should I write Rick and let him know we would love to share resources and help each other out, however we find that it is wise that we contact the publishers individually? I love open source projects, you get such good discussions going! -Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 04:47:45 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (David J. Orme) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 23:47:45 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters References: <5.0.0.25.0.20010101150250.021f7c00@beaver> <000b01c07464$a9c0a460$638c2d3f@family> Message-ID: <3A515D71.D507785@coconut-palm-software.com> Jonathan Hughes wrote: > Dear Everyone, > > So I am guessing that the conclusion of this discussion is?!?... Should > I write Rick and let him know we would love to share resources and help each > other out, however we find that it is wise that we contact the publishers > individually? That sounds like the consensus... Dave Orme (Agenda PDA frontend maintainer--no web site for this yet as I'm still in the prototype stage... :) -- The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected. -- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972 From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 16:17:12 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 10:17:12 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Hebrew Bible Copyright contact Message-ID: <000501c074d7$76ee6720$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Most all of the Bible software packages that have the Hebrew Bible use The Westminster Hebrew Morphology text. Gramcord, BibleWindows, BibleWorks, Logos, WordSearch, BART, Bible Companion all use this text. I would be interested in contacting the license holder on behalf of the Sword Project to see if you could use it. But before I did, I wanted to check with the Sword development team to make sure it was OK for me to do so. I also need to know if you would be able to work with the text if permission was granted. Below is a sample of the data format. The format appears pretty straight forward. Just looking at it I see that the fields are as follows, book, chapter, verse, X, the Hebrew word as it appears in the text, the lexical form of the word, and the morphological tag separated by a "@". The X number indicates the order from right to left of the words if combined. For example the first word in the Hebrew Bible is prefixed with the bet preposition, so the preposition takes the 1 slot and the noun takes the 2 slot. It looks like the transliteration scheme is in lower level ASCII, but I have an ASCII table to map the characters to the BWHebb TrueType font. If you wanted to use a different font with a different mapping scheme, I'm sure we could work that out as well. Remember Hebrew goes from right to left, so that will need to be taken into consideration as well when rendering the text so that it will wrap correctly. Let me know what you think. If you think this would be usable by the Sword project, I'll see what I can do about licensing. Sample datafile structure - Genesis 1 >gn1:1 gn1:1,1.1 B.: B.@Pp gn1:1,1.2 R")$I^YT R")$IYT@ncfs gn1:1,2.1 B.FRF^) B.R)_1@vqp3ms gn1:1,3.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:1,4.1 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:1,5.1 HA H@Pa gn1:1,5.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:1,6.1 W: W@Pc gn1:1,6.2 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:1,7.1 HF H@Pa gn1:1,7.2 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs >gn1:2 gn1:2,1.1 W: W@Pc gn1:2,1.2 HF H@Pa gn1:2,1.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:2,2.1 HFY:TF^H HYH@vqp3fs gn1:2,3.1 TO^HW.^ T.OHW.@ncms gn1:2,4.1 WF W@Pc gn1:2,4.2 BO^HW. B.OHW.@ncms gn1:2,5.1 W: W@Pc gn1:2,5.2 XO^$EK: XO$EK:@ncms gn1:2,6.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:2,6.2 P.:N"^Y P.FNEH@ncbpc gn1:2,7.1 T:HO^WM T.:HOWM@ncbs gn1:2,8.1 W: W@Pc gn1:2,8.2 R^W.XA RW.XA@ncbs gn1:2,9.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:2,10.1 M:RAXE^PET RXP@vpPfs gn1:2,11.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:2,11.2 P.:N"^Y P.FNEH@ncbpc gn1:2,12.1 HA H@Pa gn1:2,12.2 M.F^YIM MAYIM@ncmp >gn1:3 gn1:3,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:3,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:3,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:3,3.1 Y:HI^Y HYH@vqi3msXa{1}Jt gn1:3,4.1 )O^WR )OWR@ncbs gn1:3,5.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:3,5.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:3,5.3 )O^WR )OWR@ncbs >gn1:4 gn1:4,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:4,1.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:4,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:4,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:4,3.2 HF H@Pa gn1:4,3.3 )O^WR )OWR@ncbs gn1:4,4.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:4,4.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams gn1:4,5.1 WA W@Pc gn1:4,5.2 Y.AB:D."^L B.DL@vhw3msXa gn1:4,6.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:4,7.1 B."^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:4,8.1 HF H@Pa gn1:4,8.2 )O^WR )OWR@ncbs gn1:4,9.1 W. W@Pc gn1:4,9.2 B"^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:4,10.1 HA H@Pa gn1:4,10.2 XO^$EK: XO$EK:@ncms >gn1:5 gn1:5,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:5,1.2 Y.IQ:RF^) QR)_1@vqw3ms gn1:5,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:5,3.1 LF L@Pp+Pa gn1:5,3.2 )OWR^ )OWR@ncbs gn1:5,4.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:5,5.1 W: W@Pc gn1:5,5.2 LA L@Pp+Pa gn1:5,5.3 XO^$EK: XO$EK:@ncms gn1:5,6.1 QF^RF) QR)_1@vqp3ms gn1:5,7.1 LF^Y:LFH LAY:LFH@ncms gn1:5,8.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:5,8.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:5,8.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:5,9.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:5,9.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:5,9.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:5,10.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:5,11.1 )EXF^D )EXFD@ams gn1:5,12.1 P P@x >gn1:6 gn1:6,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:6,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:6,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:6,3.1 Y:HI^Y HYH@vqi3msXa{1}Jt gn1:6,4.1 RFQI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncms gn1:6,5.1 B.: B.@Pp gn1:6,5.2 TO^WK: T.FWEK:@ncmsc gn1:6,6.1 HA H@Pa gn1:6,6.2 M.F^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:6,7.1 WI W@Pc gn1:6,7.2 YHI^Y HYH@vqi3msXa{1}Jt gn1:6,8.1 MAB:D.I^YL B.DL@vhPms gn1:6,9.1 B."^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:6,10.1 MA^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:6,11.1 LF L@Pp gn1:6,11.2 MF^YIM MAYIM@ncmp >gn1:7 gn1:7,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:7,1.2 Y.A^(A& (&H_1@vqw3msXa gn1:7,2.1 ):ELOHIYM^ ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:7,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:7,3.2 HF H@Pa gn1:7,3.3 RFQIY(A^ RFQIY(A@ncms gn1:7,4.1 WA W@Pc gn1:7,4.2 Y.AB:D."^L B.DL@vhw3msXa gn1:7,5.1 B."^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:7,6.1 HA H@Pa gn1:7,6.2 M.A^YIM^ MAYIM@ncmp gn1:7,7.1 ):A$ER^ ):A$ER@Pr gn1:7,8.1 MI MIN@Pp gn1:7,8.2 T.A^XAT T.AXAT_1@Pp gn1:7,9.1 LF L@Pp+Pa gn1:7,9.2 RFQI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncms gn1:7,10.1 W. W@Pc gn1:7,10.2 B"^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:7,11.1 HA H@Pa gn1:7,11.2 M.A^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:7,12.1 ):A$E^R ):A$ER@Pr gn1:7,13.1 M" MIN@Pp gn1:7,13.2 (A^L (AL_2@Pp gn1:7,14.1 LF L@Pp+Pa gn1:7,14.2 RFQI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncms gn1:7,15.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:7,15.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:7,15.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:8 gn1:8,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:8,1.2 Y.IQ:RF^) QR)_1@vqw3ms gn1:8,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:8,3.1 LF^ L@Pp+Pa gn1:8,3.2 RFQI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncms gn1:8,4.1 $FMF^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:8,5.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:8,5.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:8,5.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:8,6.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:8,6.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:8,6.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:8,7.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:8,8.1 $"NI^Y $"NIY@ams gn1:8,9.1 P P@x >gn1:9 gn1:9,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:9,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:9,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:9,3.1 YIQ.FW^W. QWH_2@vni3mp{1}Jm gn1:9,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:9,4.2 M.A^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:9,5.1 MI MIN@Pp gn1:9,5.2 T.A^XAT T.AXAT_1@Pp gn1:9,6.1 HA H@Pa gn1:9,6.2 $.FMA^YIM^ $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:9,7.1 )EL- )EL@Pp gn1:9,7.2 MFQO^WM MFQOWM@ncms gn1:9,8.1 )EXF^D )EXFD@ams gn1:9,9.1 W: W@Pc gn1:9,9.2 T"RF)E^H R)H@vni3fs{1}Jm gn1:9,10.1 HA H@Pa gn1:9,10.2 Y.AB.F$F^H YAB.F$FH@ncfs gn1:9,11.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:9,11.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:9,11.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:10 gn1:10,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:10,1.2 Y.IQ:RF^) QR)_1@vqw3ms gn1:10,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:10,3.1 LA L@Pp+Pa gn1:10,3.2 Y.AB.F$FH^ YAB.F$FH@ncfs gn1:10,4.1 )E^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:10,5.1 W. W@Pc gn1:10,5.2 L: L@Pp gn1:10,5.3 MIQ:W"^H MIQ:WEH_2@ncmsc gn1:10,6.1 HA H@Pa gn1:10,6.2 M.A^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:10,7.1 QFRF^) QR)_1@vqp3ms gn1:10,8.1 YAM.I^YM YFM@ncmp gn1:10,9.1 WA W@Pc gn1:10,9.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:10,10.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:10,11.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:10,11.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams >gn1:11 gn1:11,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:11,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:11,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:11,3.1 T.A^D:$"^) D.$)@vhi3fsXa{1}Jt gn1:11,4.1 HF H@Pa gn1:11,4.2 )F^REC^ )EREC@ncbs gn1:11,5.1 D.E^$E) D.E$E)@ncms gn1:11,6.1 ^("&EB ("&EB@ncms gn1:11,7.1 MAZ:RI^Y(A ZR(@vhPms gn1:11,8.1 ZE^RA( ZERA(@ncms gn1:11,9.1 ("^C ("C@ncmsc gn1:11,10.1 P.:RI^Y P.:RIY@ncms gn1:11,11.1 (O^&EH (&H_1@vqPms gn1:11,12.1 P.:RIY^ P.:RIY@ncms gn1:11,13.1 L: L@Pp gn1:11,13.2 MIYN/O^W MIYN@ncmscX3ms gn1:11,14.1 ):A$E^R ):A$ER@Pr gn1:11,15.1 ZAR:(/OW- ZERA(@ncmscX3ms gn1:11,15.2 B/O^W B.@PpX3ms gn1:11,16.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:11,16.2 HF H@Pa gn1:11,16.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:11,17.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:11,17.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:11,17.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:12 gn1:12,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:12,1.2 T.OWC"^) YC)@vhw3fsXa gn1:12,2.1 HF H@Pa gn1:12,2.2 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:12,3.1 ^D.E$E) D.E$E)@ncms gn1:12,4.1 ("^&EB ("&EB@ncms gn1:12,5.1 MAZ:RI^Y(A ZR(@vhPms gn1:12,6.1 ZE^RA(^ ZERA(@ncms gn1:12,7.1 L: L@Pp gn1:12,7.2 MIYN/"^HW. MIYN@ncmscX3ms gn1:12,8.1 W: W@Pc gn1:12,8.2 ("^C ("C@ncms gn1:12,9.1]3 (O^&EH- (&H_1@vqPms gn1:12,9.2]3 P.:RI^Y P.:RIY@ncms gn1:12,10.1 ):A$E^R ):A$ER@Pr gn1:12,11.1 ZAR:(/OW- ZERA(@ncmscX3ms gn1:12,11.2 B/O^W B.@PpX3ms gn1:12,12.1 L: L@Pp gn1:12,12.2 MIYN/"^HW. MIYN@ncmscX3ms gn1:12,13.1 WA W@Pc gn1:12,13.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:12,14.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:12,15.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:12,15.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams >gn1:13 gn1:13,1.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:13,1.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:13,1.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:13,2.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:13,2.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:13,2.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:13,3.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:13,4.1 $:LIY$I^Y $:LIY$IY@ams gn1:13,5.1 P P@x >gn1:14 gn1:14,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:14,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:14,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:14,3.1 Y:HI^Y HYH@vqi3msXa{1}Jt gn1:14,4.1 M:)OROT^ MF)OWR@ncmp gn1:14,5.1 B.I B.@Pp gn1:14,5.2 R:QI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncmsc gn1:14,6.1 HA H@Pa gn1:14,6.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:14,7.1 L: L@Pp gn1:14,7.2 HAB:D.I^YL B.DL@vhc gn1:14,8.1 B."^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:14,9.1 HA H@Pa gn1:14,9.2 Y.O^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:14,10.1 W. W@Pc gn1:14,10.2 B"^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:14,11.1 HA H@Pa gn1:14,11.2 L.F^Y:LFH LAY:LFH@ncms gn1:14,12.1 W: W@Pc gn1:14,12.2 HFY^W. HYH@vqp3cp{2} gn1:14,13.1 L: L@Pp gn1:14,13.2 )OTOT^ )OWT@ncbp gn1:14,14.1 W. W@Pc gn1:14,14.2 L: L@Pp gn1:14,14.3 MO^W(:ADI^YM MOW("D@ncmp gn1:14,15.1 W. W@Pc gn1:14,15.2 L: L@Pp gn1:14,15.3 YFMI^YM YOWM@ncmp gn1:14,16.1 W: W@Pc gn1:14,16.2 $FNI^YM $FNFH@ncfp >gn1:15 gn1:15,1.1 W: W@Pc gn1:15,1.2 HFY^W. HYH@vqp3cp{2} gn1:15,2.1 LI L@Pp gn1:15,2.2 M:)OWROT^ MF)OWR@ncmp gn1:15,3.1 B.I B.@Pp gn1:15,3.2 R:QI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncmsc gn1:15,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:15,4.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:15,5.1 L: L@Pp gn1:15,5.2 HF)I^YR )WR@vhc gn1:15,6.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:15,6.2 HF H@Pa gn1:15,6.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:15,7.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:15,7.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:15,7.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:16 gn1:16,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:16,1.2 Y.A^(A& (&H_1@vqw3msXa gn1:16,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:16,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:16,3.2 $:N"^Y $:NAYIM@amdc gn1:16,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,4.2 M.:)ORO^T MF)OWR@ncmp gn1:16,5.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,5.2 G.:DOLI^YM G.FDOWL@amp gn1:16,6.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:16,6.2 HA H@Pa gn1:16,6.3 M.F)O^WR MF)OWR@ncms gn1:16,7.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,7.2 G.FDOL^ G.FDOWL@ams gn1:16,8.1 L: L@Pp gn1:16,8.2 MEM:$E^LET MEM:$FLFH@ncfsc gn1:16,9.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,9.2 Y.O^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:16,10.1 W: W@Pc gn1:16,10.2 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:16,10.3 HA H@Pa gn1:16,10.4 M.F)O^WR MF)OWR@ncms gn1:16,11.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,11.2 Q.F+ON^ QF+ON@ams gn1:16,12.1 L: L@Pp gn1:16,12.2 MEM:$E^LET MEM:$FLFH@ncfsc gn1:16,13.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,13.2 L.A^Y:LFH LAY:LFH@ncms gn1:16,14.1 W: W@Pc gn1:16,14.2 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:16,15.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,15.2 K.OWKFBI^YM K.OWKFB@ncmp >gn1:17 gn1:17,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:17,1.2 Y.IT."^N NTN@vqw3ms gn1:17,2.1 )OT/F^M )"T@PoX3mp gn1:17,3.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:17,4.1 B.I B.@Pp gn1:17,4.2 R:QI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncmsc gn1:17,5.1 HA H@Pa gn1:17,5.2 $.FMF^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:17,6.1 L: L@Pp gn1:17,6.2 HF)I^YR )WR@vhc gn1:17,7.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:17,7.2 HF H@Pa gn1:17,7.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs >gn1:18 gn1:18,1.1 W: W@Pc gn1:18,1.2 LI L@Pp gn1:18,1.3 M:$OL^ M$L_2@vqc gn1:18,2.1 B.A B.@Pp+Pa gn1:18,2.2 Y.O^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:18,3.1 W. W@Pc gn1:18,3.2 BA B.@Pp+Pa gn1:18,3.3 L.A^Y:LFH LAY:LFH@ncms gn1:18,4.1 W.^ W@Pc gn1:18,4.2 L:A L@Pp gn1:18,4.3 HAB:D.I^YL B.DL@vhc gn1:18,5.1 B."^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:18,6.1 HF H@Pa gn1:18,6.2 )O^WR )OWR@ncbs gn1:18,7.1 W. W@Pc gn1:18,7.2 B"^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:18,8.1 HA H@Pa gn1:18,8.2 XO^$EK: XO$EK:@ncms gn1:18,9.1 WA W@Pc gn1:18,9.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:18,10.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:18,11.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:18,11.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams >gn1:19 gn1:19,1.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:19,1.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:19,1.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:19,2.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:19,2.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:19,2.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:19,3.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:19,4.1 R:BIY(I^Y R:BIY(IY@ams gn1:19,5.1 P P@x >gn1:20 gn1:20,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:20,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:20,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:20,3.1 YI$:R:C^W. $RC@vqi3mp{1}Jm gn1:20,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:20,4.2 M.A^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:20,5.1 $E^REC $EREC@ncms gn1:20,6.1 NE^PE$ NEPE$@ncfs gn1:20,7.1 XAY.F^H XAY_1@afs gn1:20,8.1 W: W@Pc gn1:20,8.2 (OWP^ (OWP@ncms gn1:20,9.1 Y:(OWP"^P (WP_1@vei3ms{1}Jm gn1:20,10.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:20,10.2 HF H@Pa gn1:20,10.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:20,11.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:20,11.2 P.:N"^Y P.FNEH@ncbpc gn1:20,12.1 R:QI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncmsc gn1:20,13.1 HA H@Pa gn1:20,13.2 $.FMF^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp >gn1:21 gn1:21,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:21,1.2 Y.IB:RF^) B.R)_1@vqw3ms gn1:21,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:21,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:21,3.2 HA H@Pa gn1:21,3.3 T.AN.IYNI^M T.AN.IYN@ncmp gn1:21,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:21,4.2 G.:DOLI^YM G.FDOWL@amp gn1:21,5.1 W: W@Pc gn1:21,5.2 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:21,6.1 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:21,6.2 NE^PE$ NEPE$@ncfs gn1:21,7.1 HA^ H@Pa gn1:21,7.2 XAY.F^H XAY_1@afs gn1:21,8.1 HF^ H@Pa gn1:21,8.2 ROME^&ET RM&@vqPfs gn1:21,9.1 ):A$ER^ ):A$ER@Pr gn1:21,10.1 $FR:C^W. $RC@vqp3cp gn1:21,11.1 HA H@Pa gn1:21,11.2 M.A^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:21,12.1 L: L@Pp gn1:21,12.2 MI^YN/"HE^M MIYN@ncmpcX3mp gn1:21,13.1 W: W@Pc gn1:21,13.2 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:21,14.1 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:21,14.2 (O^WP (OWP@ncms gn1:21,15.1 K.FNFP^ K.FNFP@ncfs gn1:21,16.1 L: L@Pp gn1:21,16.2 MIYN/"^HW. MIYN@ncmscX3ms gn1:21,17.1 WA W@Pc gn1:21,17.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:21,18.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:21,19.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:21,19.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams >gn1:22 gn1:22,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:22,1.2 Y:BF^REK: B.RK:_2@vpw3ms gn1:22,2.1 )OT/F^M )"T@PoX3mp gn1:22,3.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:22,4.1 L" L@Pp gn1:22,4.2 )MO^R )MR_1@vqc gn1:22,5.1 P.:R^W. P.RH@vqvmp gn1:22,6.1 W. W@Pc gn1:22,6.2 R:B^W. RBH_1@vqvmp gn1:22,7.1 W. W@Pc gn1:22,7.2 MIL:)^W. ML)@vqvmp gn1:22,8.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:22,8.2 HA H@Pa gn1:22,8.3 M.A^YIM^ MAYIM@ncmp gn1:22,9.1 B.A B.@Pp+Pa gn1:22,9.2 Y.AM.I^YM YFM@ncmp gn1:22,10.1 W: W@Pc gn1:22,10.2 HF H@Pa gn1:22,10.3 (O^WP (OWP@ncms gn1:22,11.1 YI^REB RBH_1@vqi3msXa{1}Jt gn1:22,12.1 B.F B.@Pp+Pa gn1:22,12.2 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs >gn1:23 gn1:23,1.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:23,1.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:23,1.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:23,2.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:23,2.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:23,2.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:23,3.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:23,4.1 X:AMIY$I^Y X:AMIY$IY@ams gn1:23,5.1 P P@x >gn1:24 gn1:24,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:24,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:24,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:24,3.1 T.OWC"^) YC)@vhi3fsXa{1}Jt gn1:24,4.1 HF H@Pa gn1:24,4.2 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:24,5.1 NE^PE$ NEPE$@ncfs gn1:24,6.1 XAY.FH^ XAY_1@afs gn1:24,7.1 L: L@Pp gn1:24,7.2 MIYN/F^H. MIYN@ncmscX3fs gn1:24,8.1 B.:H"MF^H B.:H"MFH@ncfs gn1:24,9.1 WF W@Pc gn1:24,9.2 RE^ME& REME&@ncms gn1:24,10.1 W: W@Pc gn1:24,10.2 XA^Y:TOW- XAY.FH_1@ncfsc gn1:24,10.3 )E^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:24,11.1 L: L@Pp gn1:24,11.2 MIYN/F^H. MIYN@ncmscX3fs gn1:24,12.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:24,12.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:24,12.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:25 gn1:25,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:25,1.2 Y.A^(A& (&H_1@vqw3msXa gn1:25,2.1 ):ELOHIYM^ ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:25,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:25,3.2 XAY.A^T XAY.FH_1@ncfsc gn1:25,4.1 HF H@Pa gn1:25,4.2 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:25,5.1 L: L@Pp gn1:25,5.2 MIYN/F^H. MIYN@ncmscX3fs gn1:25,6.1 W: W@Pc gn1:25,6.2 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:25,6.3 HA H@Pa gn1:25,6.4 B.:H"MFH^ B.:H"MFH@ncfs gn1:25,7.1 L: L@Pp gn1:25,7.2 MIYN/F^H. MIYN@ncmscX3fs gn1:25,8.1 W: W@Pc gn1:25,8.2 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:25,9.1 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:25,9.2 RE^ME& REME&@ncms gn1:25,10.1 HF^ H@Pa gn1:25,10.2 ):ADFMF^H ):ADFMFH_1@ncfs gn1:25,11.1 L: L@Pp gn1:25,11.2 MIYN/"^HW. MIYN@ncmscX3ms gn1:25,12.1 WA W@Pc gn1:25,12.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:25,13.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:25,14.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:25,14.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams >gn1:26 gn1:26,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:26,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:26,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:26,3.1 NA^(:A&E^H (&H_1@vqi1cp{1}Cm gn1:26,4.1 )FDF^M )FDFM_1@ncms gn1:26,5.1 B.: B.@Pp gn1:26,5.2 CAL:M/"^NW. CELEM_1@ncmscX1cp gn1:26,6.1 K.I K.@Pp gn1:26,6.2 D:MW.T/"^NW. D.:MW.T@ncfscX1cp gn1:26,7.1 W: W@Pc gn1:26,7.2 YIR:D.W.^ RDH_1@vqi3mp{1}Jm gn1:26,8.1 BI B.@Pp gn1:26,8.2 D:GA^T D.FGFH@ncfsc gn1:26,9.1 HA H@Pa gn1:26,9.2 Y.F^M YFM@ncms gn1:26,10.1 W. W@Pc gn1:26,10.2 B: B.@Pp gn1:26,10.3 (O^WP (OWP@ncms gn1:26,11.1 HA H@Pa gn1:26,11.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:26,12.1 W. W@Pc gn1:26,12.2 BA B.@Pp+Pa gn1:26,12.3 B.:H"MFH^ B.:H"MFH@ncfs gn1:26,13.1 W. W@Pc gn1:26,13.2 B: B.@Pp gn1:26,13.3 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:26,13.4 HF H@Pa gn1:26,13.5 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:26,14.1 W. W@Pc gn1:26,14.2 B: B.@Pp gn1:26,14.3 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:26,14.4 HF H@Pa gn1:26,14.5 RE^ME& REME&@ncms gn1:26,15.1 HF^ H@Pa gn1:26,15.2 ROM"^& RM&@vqPms gn1:26,16.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:26,16.2 HF H@Pa gn1:26,16.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs >gn1:27 gn1:27,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:27,1.2 Y.IB:RF^) B.R)_1@vqw3ms gn1:27,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:27,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:27,3.2 HF^ H@Pa gn1:27,3.3 )FDFM^ )FDFM_1@ncms gn1:27,4.1 B.: B.@Pp gn1:27,4.2 CAL:M/O^W CELEM_1@ncmscX3ms gn1:27,5.1 B.: B.@Pp gn1:27,5.2 CE^LEM CELEM_1@ncms gn1:27,6.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:27,7.1 B.FRF^) B.R)_1@vqp3ms gn1:27,8.1 )OT/O^W )"T@PoX3ms gn1:27,9.1 ZFKF^R ZFKFR@ncms gn1:27,10.1 W. W@Pc gn1:27,10.2 N:Q"BF^H N:Q"BFH@ncfs gn1:27,11.1 B.FRF^) B.R)_1@vqp3ms gn1:27,12.1 )OT/F^M )"T@PoX3mp >gn1:28 gn1:28,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:28,1.2 Y:BF^REK: B.RK:_2@vpw3ms gn1:28,2.1 )OT/FM^ )"T@PoX3mp gn1:28,3.1 ):ELOHIYM^ ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:28,4.1 WA W@Pc gn1:28,4.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:28,5.1 L/FHE^M L@PpX3mp gn1:28,6.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:28,7.1 P.:R^W. P.RH@vqvmp gn1:28,8.1 W. W@Pc gn1:28,8.2 R:B^W. RBH_1@vqvmp gn1:28,9.1 W. W@Pc gn1:28,9.2 MIL:)^W. ML)@vqvmp gn1:28,10.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:28,10.2 HF H@Pa gn1:28,10.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:28,11.1 W: W@Pc gn1:28,11.2 KIB:$U^/HF K.B$@vqvmpX3fs gn1:28,12.1 W. W@Pc gn1:28,12.2 R:D^W. RDH_1@vqvmp gn1:28,13.1 B.I B.@Pp gn1:28,13.2 D:GA^T D.FGFH@ncfsc gn1:28,14.1 HA H@Pa gn1:28,14.2 Y.FM^ YFM@ncms gn1:28,15.1 W. W@Pc gn1:28,15.2 B: B.@Pp gn1:28,15.3 (O^WP (OWP@ncms gn1:28,16.1 HA H@Pa gn1:28,16.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:28,17.1 W. W@Pc gn1:28,17.2 B: B.@Pp gn1:28,17.3 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:28,17.4 XAY.F^H XAY.FH_1@ncfs gn1:28,18.1 HF^ H@Pa gn1:28,18.2 ROME^&ET RM&@vqPfs gn1:28,19.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:28,19.2 HF H@Pa gn1:28,19.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs >gn1:29 gn1:29,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:29,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:29,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:29,3.1 HIN."H^ HIN."H@Pi gn1:29,4.1 NFTA^T.IY NTN@vqp1cs gn1:29,5.1 L/FKE^M L@PpX2mp gn1:29,6.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:29,6.2 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:29,6.3 ("^&EB ("&EB@ncms gn1:29,7.1 ZOR"^(A ZR(@vqPms gn1:29,8.1 ZE^RA( ZERA(@ncms gn1:29,9.1 ):A$ER^ ):A$ER@Pr gn1:29,10.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:29,10.2 P.:N"^Y P.FNEH@ncbpc gn1:29,11.1 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:29,11.2 HF H@Pa gn1:29,11.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:29,12.1 W: W@Pc gn1:29,12.2 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:29,12.3 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:29,12.4 HF H@Pa gn1:29,12.5 ("^C ("C@ncms gn1:29,13.1 ):A$ER- ):A$ER@Pr gn1:29,13.2 B./O^W B.@PpX3ms gn1:29,14.1 P:RIY- P.:RIY@ncms gn1:29,14.2 ("^C ("C@ncms gn1:29,15.1 ZOR"^(A ZR(@vqPms gn1:29,16.1 ZF^RA( ZERA(@ncms gn1:29,17.1 L/FKE^M L@PpX2mp gn1:29,18.1 YI^H:YE^H HYH@vqi3ms gn1:29,19.1 L: L@Pp gn1:29,19.2 )FK:LF^H )FK:LFH@ncfs >gn1:30 gn1:30,1.1 W.^ W@Pc gn1:30,1.2 L: L@Pp gn1:30,1.3 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:30,1.4 XAY.A^T XAY_1@ncfsc gn1:30,2.1 ^HF H@Pa gn1:30,2.2 )FREC )EREC@ncbs gn1:30,3.1 W. W@Pc gn1:30,3.2 L: L@Pp gn1:30,3.3 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:30,3.4 (O^WP (OWP@ncms gn1:30,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:30,4.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:30,5.1 W. W@Pc gn1:30,5.2 L: L@Pp gn1:30,5.3 KO^L K.OL@ncms gn1:30,6.1 ROWM"^& RM&@vqPms gn1:30,7.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:30,7.2 HF H@Pa gn1:30,7.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:30,8.1 ):A$ER- ):A$ER@Pr gn1:30,8.2 B./OW^ B.@PpX3ms gn1:30,9.1 NE^PE$ NEPE$@ncfs gn1:30,10.1 XAY.F^H XAY_1@afs gn1:30,11.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:30,11.2 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:30,11.3 YE^REQ YEREQ@ncms gn1:30,12.1 ("^&EB ("&EB@ncms gn1:30,13.1 L: L@Pp gn1:30,13.2 )FK:LF^H )FK:LFH@ncfs gn1:30,14.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:30,14.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:30,14.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:31 gn1:31,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:31,1.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:31,2.1 ):ELOHIYM^ ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:31,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:31,3.2 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:31,3.3 ):A$E^R ):A$ER@Pr gn1:31,4.1 (F&F^H (&H_1@vqp3ms gn1:31,5.1 W: W@Pc gn1:31,5.2 HIN."H- HIN."H@Pi gn1:31,5.3 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams gn1:31,6.1 M:)O^D M:)OD@Pd gn1:31,7.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:31,7.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:31,7.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:31,8.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:31,8.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:31,8.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:31,9.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:31,10.1 HA H@Pa gn1:31,10.2 $.I$.I^Y $I$.IY@ams gn1:31,11.1 P P@x Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 16:17:09 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 10:17:09 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Project "eL" Message-ID: <000401c074d7$75293780$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> I thought you guys might be interested in taking a look at this: http://www.leningradensis.org/ The goal of the XML Leningrad Codex markup project is to produce a fresh, from scratch "mirror image" of the Leningrad Codex of the Hebrew Bible, encoded at the character/glyph level in UNICODE, which will be suitable for use in "XML-aware" applications (word processors, database engines, web-applications). Such an encoded text can be used for an infinite variety of purposes and will allow for collaborative projects via the Internet to "pyramid" knowledge, encourage the "reuse" of basic data and analysis, extend the value of limited human and financial resources, and reduce duplication of effort. Project "eL" has several innovative and unique aspects: it will be an Open Source project it will invite the participation of the general public it will endeavor to markup the entire manuscript it will produce a freely available UNICODE Hebrew font By "open source" we mean that the resulting text, although copyrighted and with an institutional custodian, will be freely distributable for any purpose. Project "eL" is also a sociological experiment, testing an adaptation of a model for human collaboration in the production of knowledge which has been successful in the software development community (e.g., GNU/Linux) and natural sciences (e.g., SETI@home). We believe that "eL" will encourage the use and study of the Hebrew Bible across the world via the Internet, and that other disciplines will be able to profit from our experience. Once the project completes its first phase, the result will be a complete Hebrew Bible usable by Sword. I figured this might be good news to you guys. Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 16:20:28 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 10:20:28 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Diatheke Message-ID: <000601c074d7$eb585800$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> I sent this to the list a couple weeks ago, but it never went through. Here it is again: _________________________________ I think I'm getting close. I'm trying to install diatheke on my server. The server is running Red Hat Linux and I telnet in. I've been using Linux for about a week or so, so my experience level is rather low. I have figured out how to do basic commands. The commands are not much different from DOS and so I'm relatively comfortable since I started computing before Windows. Anyway, this is how far I've gotten so far... I placed all of sword-1.5.tar.gz into a directory /sword and placed everything from kjv.zip into /html/sword I copied the contents of /html/kjv/kjv.conf into /sword/mods.onf and changed the paths like this: [Globals] AutoInstall=./html/sword/ [KJV] DataPath=./html/sword/kjv/ Then I ran make. It must have worked because my screen filled with gibberish and a 10.5 MB file was created in the /sword/lib directory. The file is named libsword.a I then put everything from diatheke2.0.zip into my /cgi-bin/ directory. I had to run make a few times to get it to work. I had to edit the first line of makefileto root := /home/sites/site84/sword It took me a while to figure out this is where my stuff is on the server. When I made this change, make worked and it created two files called diatheke.o and diatheke.d I then moved both of these files to /cgi-bin/ I changed the permissions on diatheke.pl to be able to execute but when I do ./diatheke.pl it says "no such file or directory" I'm running it from within my /cgi-bin/ when I try to access it from the browser http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl I get "Internal Server Error" If anyone has read down this far, can you see any obvious thing I'm doing wrong. Like I said, I'm new to Linux and perl and so I'm not real sure what all I'm doing, but I did get this far. That ought to count for something. :-) Any help would be apreciated. Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 17:10:49 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 18:10:49 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters References: <4.3.1.2.20010102023824.00ca8100@pop.indo.net.id> Message-ID: <003201c074de$f884fa40$0101a8c0@gandalf> Dear Marc, you're not troubling me... I am just new here. You can access the OLB message board the following way: assuming you use outlook express as news reader: 1. menu extra | accounts | news 2. add an item. (fill in username, email adress and news server: NEWS.ONLINEBIBLE.ORG) 3. a new item appears in your folder list. Click on it (news.onlinebible.org) 4. you can click a button to synchronize (download messages). Hope this helps. By the way - the OLB newsgroup is not really friendly towards the SWORD project. Although I was pointed to the sword projects by a friendly member, I also received unfriendly emails about SWORD. So be warned... Kind regards, Peter Snoek ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc" To: "Peter Snoek" Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 8:40 PM Subject: (was Re: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters) > Dear Peter Snoek, > Sorry to trouble you. > I just read the below: including a comment about (news.onlinebible.org). > > Could you tell me how/where to join the Online Bible mailing list/newsgroup?? > > I would like to be able to get their stuff as well. > Thanks, > ..Marc > > At 06:04 PM 1/1/01 +0100, you wrote: > >Interesting... > > > >A few weeks ago (14-12-00) I emailed the newsgroep of the online bible > >(news.onlinebible.org) asking if there was going to be an open source > >version of the OLB. A kind person pointed me in the right direction: to the > >SWORD website. > > > >A few days later I received a long email from the dutch distributor > >of the OLB stating he strongly disagreed the SWORD project because > > > >(quote) "...their website contains mostly illegal software for distributing > >copyrighted bible texts..." > >(quote") "...cannot agree with this anarchistic behaviour..." > > > >I think he is mis-understanding the target of the SWORD project: to spread > >the bible, make it be read by as many people as possible. > >As far as I can see there is nothing wrong with using the OLB texts, when I > >have bought the CD-rom. OLB gets paid, I use the sword software to read the > >bible, everybody happy ??? > > > >Like chris said, I think the publishers fear for 'hackers stealing texts' or > >something. > >Anyway, is there really anyone who DOES own the bible? > > > >Regards, > > > >Peter Snoek > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Chris Little" > >To: "SWORD Devel List" > >Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 1:10 AM > >Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters > > > > > > > I got the following from Rick Meyers, who writes e-Sword. > > > > > > >> Quote >> > > > Chris, we should work together to get the various publishers to allow > > > "their" resources made available for both of "our" products. Hopefully > >for > > > free! > > > > > > In His service, > > > > > > Rick Meyers > > > rick@e-sword.net > > > << End Quote << > > > > > > He doesn't appear to be that interested in moving to the Sword API from > >his > > > own proprietary format, but he's interested in collaborating on the > > > publisher front. Does this sound wise to the rest of you? If so, > >Jonathan > > > (I figure this is your area), could you contact him, fill him in on your > > > work so far, and see how he can help. > > > > > > If we want to extend this further, I believe we could convince the people > >at > > > TOLBSS to join us also in asking publishers for permission to freely > > > distribute texts they own. The up side is that we would get more help > > > dealing with publishers. The down side is that the publishers may get the > > > impression that they would be giving too much away by granting this sort > >of > > > permission to multiple projects at once. > > > > > > Some good news also: I got permission from Larry Nelson for us to > >distribute > > > all his works, except those which require royalty payments to others. > >That > > > means we can distribute the JPS translation (which has been down for a > >month > > > or so, since I found out we didn't have permission to distribute it), the > > > Rotherham translation (in progress), and the Murdock translation (still > > > being worked on by him). Larry is also going to contact me with some > > > information about the Brenton, Lamsa, and Phillips translations, regarding > > > their necessary royalty payments. We can judge from that information > > > whether we want to pursue distributing them. The payments may be > >reasonable > > > enough to allow us to just pay for them ourselves or we might consider > > > something like selling unlock codes through PayPal. > > > > > > --Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 19:32:43 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 11:32:43 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Hebrew Bible Copyright contact In-Reply-To: <000501c074d7$76ee6720$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: > Most all of the Bible software packages that have the Hebrew Bible use > The Westminster Hebrew Morphology text. Gramcord, BibleWindows, > BibleWorks, > Logos, WordSearch, BART, Bible Companion all use this text. I would be > interested in contacting the license holder on behalf of the Sword Project > to see if you could use it. This sounds great, if we can get permission. > It looks like the transliteration scheme is in lower level ASCII, > but I have > an ASCII table to map the characters to the BWHebb TrueType font. If you > wanted to use a different font with a different mapping scheme, > I'm sure we > could work that out as well. It would be good if we had a way to do transliteration into readable Roman characters also. Biola's Unbound Bible page has a transliterated BHS, but it's still far from readable (uses +'s and $'s for example). > >gn1:1 > gn1:1,1.1 B.: B.@Pp > gn1:1,1.2 R")$I^YT R")$IYT@ncfs > gn1:1,2.1 B.FRF^) B.R)_1@vqp3ms > gn1:1,3.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp Here is how I would render that portion of Gen 1:1: B.: B.Pp R")$I^YT R")$IYTncfs B.FRF^) B.R)_1vqp3ms ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYMncmp It adds a couple tags to the GBF spec (RL/Rl for Lexical form and RM/Rm for morphological tag). We might want to reverse the ordering on the text in the module rather than do it in the filter just to avoid the pain of keeping track of which parts of a line to reverse and which to maintain. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 19:59:30 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 11:59:30 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Diatheke In-Reply-To: <000601c074d7$eb585800$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: First, I would strongly recommend using the latest version of SWORD from CVS. It has a MUCH improved version of Diatheke in it that fixes many bugs and includes support for new ThML modules. It's also easier to build since it's in the SWORD source tree already, in the apps/console/diatheke directory. If you don't want to bother with getting CVS, tell me and I can post a snapshot online. > I placed all of sword-1.5.tar.gz into a directory /sword and placed > everything from kjv.zip into /html/sword > > I copied the contents of /html/kjv/kjv.conf into /sword/mods.onf > and changed > the paths like this: You will probably find it easier to use the new module configuration format, which doesn't require copying all the module .conf files into a single big mods.conf file. To use it you just need to set up an environment variable SWORD_PATH equal to the directory containing your mods.d directory. In your case I would use /sword. You could add a line "export SWORD_PATH=/sword" to one of your startup scripts, like /etc/bashrc or /etc/profile to make this the default setting for all users. Then you can just install new modules by unzipping them into /sword. The .conf files will go into /sword/mods.d and the rest of the module files will go somewhere in the /sword/modules tree. > It took me a while to figure out this is where my stuff is on the server. > When I made this change, make worked and it created two files called > diatheke.o and diatheke.d Those are both intermediate/temporary build files. There should also have been a file called, simply, "diatheke". That's the actual executable. I'd recommend putting it somewhere where it is accessible by all users (including the httpd daemon running as user nobody) such as /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin. The next thing you need to do is copy diatheke.pl and dia-def.pl into you cgi-bin directory. Now edit diatheke.pl. There are two variables at the beginning that need to be changed. $diatheke should be set to match the location of diatheke (the executable) on your machine. "nice /usr/bin/diatheke" is the default, so leave it if you placed diatheke in /usr/bin. The 'nice' should be left as well, and just tells the cgi to run the program at low priority. $sword_path should be set equal to the environment variable you set for the path, in your case "/sword". The cgi should now be set up. Loading http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl should give a blank page, with a SWORD logo at the bottom. http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl?KJV=on&verse=jn3:16 should actually show a verse. You can use index-public.html from the diatheke directory as a template for building your own HTML interface to the CGI. If you have any other questions, please do ask. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 20:53:25 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 14:53:25 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Hebrew Bible Copyright contact In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001701c074fe$0cc7a6a0$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Chris, OK. Great, I'll work on it. BTW: I also have a copy of the Hebrew Bible from the Oxford Text Archive that has been converted to MS Word using the free SIL Ezra Hebrew font. It is not morphologically tagged but it has a much more lax license agreement. I'll have to read it again, but I'm pretty sure that derivative works can be distributed if they remain free. Would you like to take a look at that file? I played around with it some and converted it to WordPerfect and to PDF as well. Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org > [mailto:owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org]On Behalf Of Chris Little > Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 1:33 PM > To: sword-devel@crosswire.org > Subject: RE: [sword-devel] Hebrew Bible Copyright contact > > > > > Most all of the Bible software packages that have the Hebrew Bible use > > The Westminster Hebrew Morphology text. Gramcord, BibleWindows, > > BibleWorks, > > Logos, WordSearch, BART, Bible Companion all use this text. I would be > > interested in contacting the license holder on behalf of the > Sword Project > > to see if you could use it. > > This sounds great, if we can get permission. > > > It looks like the transliteration scheme is in lower level ASCII, > > but I have > > an ASCII table to map the characters to the BWHebb TrueType font. If you > > wanted to use a different font with a different mapping scheme, > > I'm sure we > > could work that out as well. > > It would be good if we had a way to do transliteration into readable Roman > characters also. Biola's Unbound Bible page has a > transliterated BHS, but > it's still far from readable (uses +'s and $'s for example). > > > >gn1:1 > > gn1:1,1.1 B.: B.@Pp > > gn1:1,1.2 R")$I^YT R")$IYT@ncfs > > gn1:1,2.1 B.FRF^) B.R)_1@vqp3ms > > gn1:1,3.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp > > Here is how I would render that portion of Gen 1:1: > > B.: B.Pp R")$I^YT R")$IYTncfs B.FRF^) > B.R)_1vqp3ms ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYMncmp > > It adds a couple tags to the GBF spec (RL/Rl for Lexical form and > RM/Rm for > morphological tag). We might want to reverse the ordering on the text in > the module rather than do it in the filter just to avoid the pain > of keeping > track of which parts of a line to reverse and which to maintain. > > --Chris > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 21:05:23 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 15:05:23 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Diatheke In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001801c074ff$b9395a40$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Chris, Forgive my ignorance but I'm not exactly sure what "CVS" or a "snapshot" is. I think I understand everything else you have explained. Once I get it set up and have http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl working, I want to create a few nifty things using Miva. Its the only scripting language I'm real familiar with. It will be able to make a call to the http command line and get anything I ask it for and integrate it into a dynamic web page. But first I need to get Diatheke working. so I guess if you could get me that snapshot we could go from there. thanks for your help. Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org > [mailto:owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org]On Behalf Of Chris Little > Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 2:00 PM > To: sword-devel@crosswire.org > Subject: RE: [sword-devel] Diatheke > > > First, I would strongly recommend using the latest version of SWORD from > CVS. It has a MUCH improved version of Diatheke in it that fixes > many bugs > and includes support for new ThML modules. It's also easier to > build since > it's in the SWORD source tree already, in the apps/console/diatheke > directory. > > If you don't want to bother with getting CVS, tell me and I can post a > snapshot online. > > > I placed all of sword-1.5.tar.gz into a directory /sword and placed > > everything from kjv.zip into /html/sword > > > > I copied the contents of /html/kjv/kjv.conf into /sword/mods.onf > > and changed > > the paths like this: > > You will probably find it easier to use the new module > configuration format, > which doesn't require copying all the module .conf files into a single big > mods.conf file. To use it you just need to set up an environment variable > SWORD_PATH equal to the directory containing your mods.d > directory. In your > case I would use /sword. You could add a line "export > SWORD_PATH=/sword" to > one of your startup scripts, like /etc/bashrc or /etc/profile to make this > the default setting for all users. > > Then you can just install new modules by unzipping them into /sword. The > .conf files will go into /sword/mods.d and the rest of the module > files will > go somewhere in the /sword/modules tree. > > > It took me a while to figure out this is where my stuff is on > the server. > > When I made this change, make worked and it created two files called > > diatheke.o and diatheke.d > > Those are both intermediate/temporary build files. There should also have > been a file called, simply, "diatheke". That's the actual > executable. I'd > recommend putting it somewhere where it is accessible by all users > (including the httpd daemon running as user nobody) such as /usr/bin or > /usr/local/bin. > > The next thing you need to do is copy diatheke.pl and dia-def.pl into you > cgi-bin directory. Now edit diatheke.pl. There are two variables at the > beginning that need to be changed. $diatheke should be set to match the > location of diatheke (the executable) on your machine. "nice > /usr/bin/diatheke" is the default, so leave it if you placed diatheke in > /usr/bin. The 'nice' should be left as well, and just tells the > cgi to run > the program at low priority. $sword_path should be set equal to the > environment variable you set for the path, in your case "/sword". > > The cgi should now be set up. Loading > http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl should give a blank page, with a > SWORD logo at the bottom. > http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl?KJV=on&verse=jn3:16 > should actually > show a verse. You can use index-public.html from the diatheke > directory as > a template for building your own HTML interface to the CGI. > > If you have any other questions, please do ask. > > --Chris > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 3 12:59:27 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Leon Brooks) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 20:59:27 +0800 Subject: [sword-devel] make register Message-ID: <3A53222F.3000002@brooks.fdns.net> My email from ``make register'' (sword library) bounced: unknown user ``sword.users'' at crosswire.org. -- Windows 98: n. 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that can't stand 1 bit of competition. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 3 22:04:33 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 15:04:33 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] make register References: <3A53222F.3000002@brooks.fdns.net> Message-ID: <3A53A1F1.ED0F9EC9@crosswire.org> Leon, Thanks, the virtusertable had sword.user instead of sword.users. Appreciate your report. -Troy. Leon Brooks wrote: > > My email from ``make register'' (sword library) bounced: unknown user > ``sword.users'' at crosswire.org. > > -- > Windows 98: n. > 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an > 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor, > written by a 2 bit company, that can't stand 1 bit of competition. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 5 01:04:04 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 02:04:04 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] PDAs / SA1110 References: <3A4401BA.FB9FE022@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <001b01c076b3$65f78e00$0101a8c0@gandalf> Hi there I have a HP Jornada 680 Windows CE 3.0 handheld. Do you guys think the SWORD will be portable to windows CE ?? any info would be great! Peter Snoek ----- Original Message ----- From: "Troy A. Griffitts" To: ; Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2000 2:36 AM Subject: [sword-devel] PDAs / SA1110 > Hurray! I got my iPaq finally! > > I have linux installed (see http://www.ipaqlinux.com). > > I spent a little time adding a new target: arm, in the make system. You > should be able to build the sword libraries for the arm cpu now. After > having some success with the command line tools, I copied over cheatah > and reworked it slightly for a small device. The new UI is under > sword/apps/X11/micros/ It's pretty cool to see sword running on a > handheld! :) The compression drivers work really well in this > scenerio. Slow search though. It takes about 1 minute to search the > entire compressed KJV module on the ipaq. I'll post screen shots soon. > I'll also build a tarball of compiled binaries plus a few compressed > modules, for the ipaq. > > Chris, > I still want to try out your PDQ web interface. I have to get irda to > work via my Nokia 8290 now, grab a WAP browser, and then try out your > stuff. Putting all the texts on the device won't be as cool/practicle > as grabbing any text off of the website on demand! > > -Troy. > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 5 02:49:25 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 18:49:25 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] PDAs / SA1110 In-Reply-To: <001b01c076b3$65f78e00$0101a8c0@gandalf> Message-ID: > I have a HP Jornada 680 Windows CE 3.0 handheld. > Do you guys think the SWORD will be portable to windows CE ?? > any info would be great! I'm going to try my hardest to get Sword compiled for WCE 3.0 using MS's free embedded VC++. It's not going very well right now because CE lacks STL, though I found a promising portable version of STL at www.stlport.org. Once the sword library compiles, a whole new frontend will still need to be written since there aren't currently any written for Win32 using MFC that could be ported. I am very excited about the whole thing though, including possibly using MS's ClearText sub-pixel text rendering, text-to-speech and speech recognition if free libraries can be found, and synchronization of desktop & handheld personal commentaries. But first this little STL hurdle needs to be crossed. :) --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 5 20:15:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (William Deer) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 15:15:01 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] CDs WHY AM I GETTING YOUR MAIL???????????????????? References: <004001c039cd$280a0c80$b5815940@kih.net> Message-ID: <003601c07755$7a3fc920$160915ac@wnyric.org> I'd love to get a copy - Bill Deer 4125 Ransom RD Clarence, NY 14031 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Crystal Mason" To: "???" Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 8:04 AM Subject: Fw: [sword-devel] CDs WHY AM I GETTING YOUR MAIL???????????????????? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Troy A. Griffitts > To: > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 3:09 AM > Subject: [sword-devel] CDs > > > > Now that we are ALL CAUGHT UP ON CD ORDERS (WHOOO HOOOO). > > > > I would like to offer them to the developers and testers. > > > > I would love to send some of you CDs from our second official batch. If > > you would like to give me your mailing address, I will get some out > > within the next few days. > > > > Jerry, we should have lunch again! I have ton's of extras now. And the > > latest installer implements some of the suggestions you and Geoff gave > > me about locked modules. > > > > Praise God for friends, friends' girlfriends, and out of work high > > school students!!! > > -Troy. > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 6 02:14:13 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Kirt Christensen) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 21:14:13 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] PDAs / SA1110 Message-ID: OK, I've been hoping somone might take an interest in CE with me. Is this link to a CE port for stl a new one for you to consider? http://users.iol.it/g.govi/stlport_ce_en.html I'll be out for a couple of weeks to Tucson but when I return I'll try to look it over if you are not having luck with another port. Has anyone actually got the Sword libraries to link to a UI under VC++ at all yet? I have some MFC UI components built in house that I can cyphen off for making a decent UI on a ce platform. It would make for some good sanctification of the code sense much of it may become part of a weapon system on a handheld device for the infantry. >From: "Chris Little" >Reply-To: sword-devel@crosswire.org >To: >Subject: RE: [sword-devel] PDAs / SA1110 >Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 18:49:25 -0800 > > > > I have a HP Jornada 680 Windows CE 3.0 handheld. > > Do you guys think the SWORD will be portable to windows CE ?? > > any info would be great! > >I'm going to try my hardest to get Sword compiled for WCE 3.0 using MS's >free embedded VC++. It's not going very well right now because CE lacks >STL, though I found a promising portable version of STL at www.stlport.org. >Once the sword library compiles, a whole new frontend will still need to be >written since there aren't currently any written for Win32 using MFC that >could be ported. I am very excited about the whole thing though, including >possibly using MS's ClearText sub-pixel text rendering, text-to-speech and >speech recognition if free libraries can be found, and synchronization of >desktop & handheld personal commentaries. But first this little STL hurdle >needs to be crossed. :) > >--Chris > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 7 11:22:04 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 21:22:04 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings Message-ID: <3A58515C.FE3A3754@bigfoot.com> Troy, I remember sometime back you mentioned that you thought using JNI bindings to the Sword C++ libraries would be an inappropriate way to make a Java API. Can you explain why again? Thanks, Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 7 21:26:22 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 13:26:22 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] WinCE update In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I've passed the first hurdle to compiling SWORD for WinCE. STL is working with the use of STLport. Many of our source files now compile in eVC++. The problem I'm currently addressing is the lack of many basic C/C++ functions & constants in the WinCE SDK. File access and SystemV descended functions & constants in particular are absent. It's rather disappointing to see, because I had been of the impression that WinCE was a real OS (at least in the same sense as Win95 is) and not a toy OS. My first course of action will be to add headers from VC++'s Win32 SDK to the build, then to port around functions that truly don't exist for CE. Still, with the STL issues apparently worked out, I am hopeful. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 7 22:35:16 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joe Walker) Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 22:35:16 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings References: <3A58515C.FE3A3754@bigfoot.com> Message-ID: <3A58EF24.C957EF54@eireneh.com> Hi, Not sure I've seen an answer to this, and Troy may have a totally different answer, but to me JNI is sometimes useful if the native interface you need is very simple, and the functionallity it provides is complex, and no Java alternative exists. Often the complexities of debugging JNI make for a total nightmare time, and the interface code is not intuative at all. I've been programming in Java for several years and without doubt JNI is my worst experience. Websphere tries hard, but JNI takes he crown for horribility. I have some Java code to read sword data files if you are interested. Joe. Paul Gear wrote: > Troy, > > I remember sometime back you mentioned that you thought using JNI > bindings to the Sword C++ libraries would be an inappropriate way to > make a Java API. Can you explain why again? > > Thanks, > Paul > --------- > "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 > http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 8 07:58:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Tsoloane Moahloli) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 09:58:42 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings In-Reply-To: <3A58EF24.C957EF54@eireneh.com> Message-ID: Hi Joe, Just to say, I like your files. I have written some java stuff to reproduce all of the information in canon.h and should be able to reproduce VerseKey type activity in the next little while. Troy, I there somewhere we can have the Java Code stored centrally so that people can have access to it. I should have basic functionality after the weekend unless I get some unforseen emergency at work. Cheers, T. Oh and compliments of the new year to all. On 07-Jan-2001 Joe Walker wrote: > > Hi, > > Not sure I've seen an answer to this, and Troy may have a totally different > answer, but to me JNI is sometimes useful if the native interface you need is > very simple, and the functionallity it provides is complex, and no Java > alternative exists. > > Often the complexities of debugging JNI make for a total nightmare time, and > the > interface code is not intuative at all. I've been programming in Java for > several years and without doubt JNI is my worst experience. Websphere tries > hard, but JNI takes he crown for horribility. > > I have some Java code to read sword data files if you are interested. > > Joe. > > > Paul Gear wrote: > >> Troy, >> >> I remember sometime back you mentioned that you thought using JNI >> bindings to the Sword C++ libraries would be an inappropriate way to >> make a Java API. Can you explain why again? >> >> Thanks, >> Paul >> --------- >> "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 >> http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear -- An error can never become true however many times you repeat it. The truth can never be wrong, even if no one hears it. - Mahatma Gandhi Tsoloane Moahloli Zen Computing (Pty)Ltd. phone +27 11 706 7054 email: tsoloane@zen.co.za URL: http://www.zen.co.za From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 8 08:31:19 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 18:31:19 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings References: <3A58515C.FE3A3754@bigfoot.com> <3A58EF24.C957EF54@eireneh.com> Message-ID: <3A597AD7.DEDC98F4@bigfoot.com> Joe Walker wrote: > > Hi, > > Not sure I've seen an answer to this, and Troy may have a totally different > answer, but to me JNI is sometimes useful if the native interface you need is > very simple, and the functionallity it provides is complex, and no Java > alternative exists. > > Often the complexities of debugging JNI make for a total nightmare time, and the > interface code is not intuative at all. I've been programming in Java for > several years and without doubt JNI is my worst experience. Websphere tries > hard, but JNI takes he crown for horribility. > > I have some Java code to read sword data files if you are interested. I know that it's not pretty, but i think that its the best way to ensure compatibility with the C++ libraries and take advantage of new features like compression, so i'd rather bind to the real API than use a rewrite if i can. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 8 19:29:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joe Walker) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 19:29:01 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings References: <3A58515C.FE3A3754@bigfoot.com> <3A58EF24.C957EF54@eireneh.com> <3A597AD7.DEDC98F4@bigfoot.com> Message-ID: <3A5A14FD.4E4FB962@eireneh.com> Paul Gear wrote: > > Joe Walker wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Not sure I've seen an answer to this, and Troy may have a totally > > different > > answer, but to me JNI is sometimes useful if the native interface you > > need is > > very simple, and the functionallity it provides is complex, and no Java > > alternative exists. > > > > Often the complexities of debugging JNI make for a total nightmare > > time, and the > > interface code is not intuative at all. I've been programming in Java for > > several years and without doubt JNI is my worst experience. Websphere > > tries > > hard, but JNI takes he crown for horribility. > > > > I have some Java code to read sword data files if you are interested. > > I know that it's not pretty, but i think that its the best way to ensure > compatibility with the C++ libraries and take advantage of new features > like compression, so i'd rather bind to the real API than use a rewrite > if i can. Given a working Java version which only took a day or so to write from scratch given C++ source I'd say keeping up to date is a non-issue unless you intend to change the format often (I hope not) Let me add a few more things against JNI: Speed - in my current assignment we are forced to use C crypto code via JNI for DES3 instead of one of the many Java implementations. The C code is up to 30 times slower. This may be an extreme example but it does make a point. Debugging - really do not under-estimeate how hard it is to debug in 2 languages at the same time even trusty friends like printf or println start to get confused with 2 languages potentially messing with stdout/stderr. Stability - A well written 100% Java program will be very crash proof. Add a single JNI call and all of a sudden the chance or a core soars. Portability - ... Build Complexity - ... Launch Complexity - Now I have to worry about my LD_LIBRARY_PATH/PATH variables as well as my CLASSPATH variable Joe. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 8 19:32:09 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joe Walker) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 19:32:09 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings References: Message-ID: <3A5A15B9.D019F29F@eireneh.com> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------810927BB1A03BEF326827EF7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tsoloane Moahloli wrote: > > Hi Joe, > > Just to say, I like your files. ... Assuming this was a request not a complement :) ... I've attached the .java in question, and in the next few days I'll update my web site with the latest release which puts that in a servlet. Joe. --------------810927BB1A03BEF326827EF7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="RawVerse.java" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="RawVerse.java" package com.eireneh.bible.book.sword; import java.io.*; /** * Code for class 'RawVerse'- a module that reads raw text files * ot and nt using indexs ??.bks ??.cps ??.vss and provides lookup and parsing * functions based on class VerseKey */ public class RawVerse { /** constant for the introduction */ public static final int TESTAMENT_INTRO = 0; /** constant for the old testament */ public static final int TESTAMENT_OLD = 1; /** constant for the new testament */ public static final int TESTAMENT_NEW = 2; /** * RawVerse Constructor - Initializes data for instance of RawVerse * @param path - path of the directory where data and index files are located. * be sure to include the trailing separator (e.g. '/' or '\') * (e.g. 'modules/texts/rawtext/webster/') */ public RawVerse(String path) throws FileNotFoundException { idx_raf[TESTAMENT_OLD] = new RandomAccessFile(path + "ot.vss", "r"); idx_raf[TESTAMENT_NEW] = new RandomAccessFile(path + "nt.vss", "r"); txt_raf[TESTAMENT_OLD] = new RandomAccessFile(path + "ot", "r"); txt_raf[TESTAMENT_NEW] = new RandomAccessFile(path + "nt", "r"); // The original had a dtor that did the equiv of .close()ing the above // I'm not sure that there is a delete type ability in Book.java and // the finalizer for RandomAccessFile will do it anyway so for the // moment I'm going to ignore this. // The original also stored the path, but I don't think it ever used it // The original also kept an instance count, which went unused (and I // noticed in a few other places so it is either c&p or a pattern? // Either way the assumption that there is only one of a static is not // safe in many java environments (servlets, ejbs at least) so I've // deleted it } /** * Finds the offset of the key verse from the indexes * @param testament testament to find (0 - Bible/module introduction) * @param idxoff offset into .vss * @param start address to store the starting offset * @param size address to store the size of the entry */ public Location findOffset(int testament, long idxoff) throws IOException { Location loc = new Location(); // There was a bodge here to move testament around if someone wanted // to read the intro? We just have the set of static finals above // if (testament == 0) // testament = idx_raf[1] == null ? 1 : 2; // There was a test here to check ensure that is idx_raf[testament-1] // was null then we returned an default Location (of 0,0). However // This seems like papering over any errors so I have left it out for // the time being // I've now totally re-written this because we did have byte-sex // problems. The file is little endian, and we read big endianly. // read the next 6 byes. idx_raf[testament].seek(idxoff*6); byte[] read = new byte[6]; idx_raf[testament].readFully(read); int[] temp = new int[6]; for (int i=0; i= 0 ? read[i] : 256 + read[i]; System.out.println("temp["+i+"]="+temp[i]); } loc.start = (temp[3] << 24) | (temp[2] << 16) | (temp[1] << 8) | temp[0]; loc.size = (temp[5] << 8) | temp[4]; // the original lseek used SEEK_SET. This is the only option in Java // The *6 is because we use 4 bytes for the offset, and 2 for the length // There used to be some code at the start of the method like: // idxoff *= 6; // But itn't good to alter parameters and here is the only place that // it is used. // There was some BIGENDIAN swapping stuff here. To be honest I // can't be bothered to think about whether or not this is needed // right now. // *start = lelong(*start); // *size = leshort(*size); // There was also some code here to patch over any errors if you // could only read one of the 2 bytes from above. I'm not sure that // that is a good idea, so I've left it out. return loc; } /** * Gets text at a given offset. * @param testament testament file to search in (0 - Old; 1 - New) * @param loc Where to read from */ public String getText(int testament, Location loc) throws IOException { // The original had the size param as an unsigned short. // It also used SEEK_SET as above (default in Java) byte[] buffer = new byte[loc.size]; txt_raf[testament].seek(loc.start); txt_raf[testament].read(buffer); // We should probably think about encodings here? return new String(buffer); } /** * Prepares the text before returning it to external objects * @param buf buffer where text is stored and where to store the prep'd text */ protected String prepText(String text) { StringBuffer buf = new StringBuffer(text); boolean space = false; boolean cr = false; boolean realdata = false; char nlcnt = 0; int to = 0; for (int from=0; from 1) { // buf.setCharAt(to++, nl); buf.setCharAt(to++, '\n'); // nlcnt = 0; } continue; case 13: if (!realdata) continue; buf.setCharAt(to++, '\n'); space = false; cr = true; continue; } realdata = true; nlcnt = 0; if (space) { space = false; if (buf.charAt(from) != ' ') { buf.setCharAt(to++, ' '); from--; continue; } } buf.setCharAt(to++, buf.charAt(from)); } // This next line just ensured that we were null terminated. // buf.setCharAt(to, '\0'); // There followed a lot of code that stomed \o to the end of the // string if there was whitespace there. trim() is easier. return buf.toString().trim(); } /** * Sets text for current offset * @param testament testament to find (0 - Bible/module introduction) * @param idxoff offset into .vss * @param buf buffer to store */ protected void setText(int testament, long idxoff, String buf) throws IOException { // As in getText() we don't alter the formal parameter // idxoff *= 6; // As in getText() There was some messing around with testament // if (testament == 0) // testament = idx_raf[1] == null ? 1 : 2; // outsize started off being unsigned // and it looks like "unsigned short size;" is not used short outsize = (short) buf.length(); // There was some more BIGENDIAN nonsense here. Again ignoring the // MACOSX bits it looked like: // start = lelong(start); // outsize = leshort(size); // I've also moved things around very slightly, the endian bits came // just before the writeShort(); idx_raf[testament].seek(idxoff*6); long start = idx_raf[testament].readLong(); idx_raf[testament].writeShort(outsize); // There is some encoding stuff to be thought about here byte[] data = buf.getBytes(); txt_raf[testament].seek(start); txt_raf[testament].write(data); } /** * Creates new module files * @param path Directory to store module files */ public static void createModule(String path) throws IOException { truncate(path + "ot.vss"); truncate(path + "nt.vss"); truncate(path + "ot"); truncate(path + "nt"); // I'm not at all sure what these did. I'd guess they wrote data to // the files we just created? But how they'd neatly (or otherwise) go // about this is beyond me right now. // RawVerse rv(path); // VerseKey mykey("Rev 22:21"); } /** * Create an empty file, deleting what was there */ private static void truncate(String filename) throws IOException { // The original code did something like this. I recon this basically // deleted and recreated (empty) the named file. // unlink(buf); // fd = FileMgr::systemFileMgr.open(buf, O_CREAT|O_WRONLY|O_BINARY, S_IREAD|S_IWRITE); // FileMgr::systemFileMgr.close(fd); File file = new File(filename); file.delete(); file.createNewFile(); } /** * There has to be a better method than this. findoffset() returned a start * and and offset, and multiple return values are not possible in Java. * It seems to me that returning start and size from a public i/f represents * showing our callers more than we should and I expect that the solution * lies in a thorough sorting out if the interface, but I want to keep * the methods unchanged as reasonable right now. */ public class Location { /** Where does the data start */ public long start = 0; /** The data length. Is short long enough? the original was unsigned short */ public int size = 0; /** * Debug only */ public String toString() { return "start="+start+", size="+size; } } /** * A test program */ public static void main(String[] args) { try { // To start with I'm going to hard code the path String path = "/usr/apps/sword/modules/texts/rawtext/kjv/"; RawVerse verse = new RawVerse(path); Location loc = verse.findOffset(RawVerse.TESTAMENT_NEW, 6); String pre = verse.getText(RawVerse.TESTAMENT_NEW, loc); System.out.println("loc="+loc); System.out.println("pre="+pre); System.out.println("post="+verse.prepText(pre)); } catch (Exception ex) { ex.printStackTrace(); } } /** The array of index files */ private RandomAccessFile[] idx_raf = new RandomAccessFile[3]; /** The array of data files */ private RandomAccessFile[] txt_raf = new RandomAccessFile[3]; } --------------810927BB1A03BEF326827EF7-- From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 9 04:38:56 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (David Twyerould) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 15:38:56 +1100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie Message-ID: Hi! I've just joined the Sword developer forum and I'm interested in helping out with a Java version of Sword. I have a few questions that perhaps someone could help me with. (1). what is the functionality that sword is trying to provide? Is there are requirements document or a list of desired functions somewhere? (2). what is the architecture/design that is being followed? Is there a spec or a description of the current implementation? Is there any documentation on the file formats? I'm keen to help out with the Java version of Sword, I am an experienced Java developer (last 4 years in enterprise and web development). Is anyone heading up this development? Troy put me on to the CVS server where there is the beginnings of a port of the C++ code to Java - but it looks like there is a lot to be done..? By the way, is there an online archive somewhere of this forum so I don't have to ask silly questions that have already been answered? Regards, David Twyerould e-Business Solutions Development (South.), IBM Global Services (CS13). Australia Ph: +61-3-96270345 Mobile: +61-0412-265186 Notes: David Twyerould/Australia/IBM Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 10 19:41:59 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:41:59 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] http://www.ccel.org/facsim/ Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> --=====================_10652963==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed CCEL has a system for using digital facsimiles of texts on-line along with ORC versions of the texts so that the OCR texts can be proofread and corrected on-line. The software for doing this is being distributed under the GNU Public License. Perhaps Chris or Troy could provide a site for texts that would be of use with the Sword but could use this type of proofreading and editing. Or, such texts could be sent to CCEL for editing there. Jerry --=====================_10652963==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" CCEL has a system for using digital facsimiles of texts on-line along with ORC versions of the texts so that the OCR texts can be proofread and corrected on-line. The software for doing this is being distributed under the GNU Public License.

Perhaps Chris or Troy could provide a site for texts that would be of use with the Sword but could use this type of proofreading and editing. Or, such texts could be sent to CCEL for editing there.

Jerry --=====================_10652963==_.ALT-- From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 10 21:03:22 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Martin Gruner) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:03:22 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] http://www.ccel.org/facsim/ In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> References: <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <01011022032200.25435@martin> Very good idea. Martin > > CCEL has a system for using digital facsimiles of texts on-line along with > ORC versions of the texts so that the OCR texts can be proofread and > corrected on-line. The software for doing this is being distributed under > the GNU Public License. > > Perhaps Chris or Troy could provide a site for texts that would be of use > with the Sword but could use this type of proofreading and editing. Or, > such texts could be sent to CCEL for editing there. > > Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 10:21:48 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (David Burry) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 02:21:48 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] http://www.ccel.org/facsim/ In-Reply-To: <01011022032200.25435@martin> References: <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20010111014052.0204c4a0@beaver> I would be willing to personally donate a copy of Adobe Acrobat Capture, Personal Edition (20,000 page license) to God's work of converting Copyright-free/permission-granted Biblical texts into unencumbered freely distributable online form if anyone here would seriously be able to put it to good use..... As an employee I am able to purchase up to 5 copies of this product per year for a substantial discount. If anyone's trying to profit off of me from it they can jolly well pay the regular price for it and help my stock options in the process but when I freely receive I want to freely give, and when I see others freely giving that's who I want to give back to. See http://www.adobe.com/products/acrcapture/main.html for more info. Dave Senior Web Developer, Adobe Systems At 10:03 PM 1/10/2001 +0100, Martin Gruner wrote: >Very good idea. > >Martin > > > > CCEL has a system for using digital facsimiles of texts on-line along > with > > ORC versions of the texts so that the OCR texts can be proofread and > > corrected on-line. The software for doing this is being distributed under > > the GNU Public License. > > > > Perhaps Chris or Troy could provide a site for texts that would be of use > > with the Sword but could use this type of proofreading and editing. Or, > > such texts could be sent to CCEL for editing there. > > > > Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 18:12:33 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 11:12:33 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] http://www.ccel.org/facsim/ In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.0.20010111014052.0204c4a0@beaver> References: <01011022032200.25435@martin> <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010111102736.00949ae0@mail.dancris.com> That is a nice offer, Dave. In the past Bible Foundation has scanned PD works, but we have not done that in long time. Most of what we have gotten has been from others that have scanned, OCRed and edited the works. We don't have Windows NT so I don't think we could take your offer for our computers. However, we could still scan and OCR some texts if others would proofread and edit them. Which is the nice thing about http://www.ccel.org/facsim/ . After the page images and OCRed pages are put on-line. It allows multiple users to select pages for reading and editing without each reader needing an original text. Troy has also done some work to provide a bases for Sword users to edit Sword texts and send the corrections in. I don't know how that is coming, but it would be nice to have new texts go through some proofreading before general distribution. Jerry Hastings Bible Foundation At 02:21 AM 1/11/2001 -0800, David Burry wrote: >I would be willing to personally donate a copy of Adobe Acrobat Capture, >Personal Edition (20,000 page license) to God's work of converting >Copyright-free/permission-granted Biblical texts into unencumbered freely >distributable online form if anyone here would seriously be able to put it >to good use..... As an employee I am able to purchase up to 5 copies of >this product per year for a substantial discount. If anyone's trying to >profit off of me from it they can jolly well pay the regular price for it > and help my stock options in the process but when I freely >receive I want to freely give, and when I see others freely giving that's >who I want to give back to. > >See http://www.adobe.com/products/acrcapture/main.html for more info. > >Dave > >Senior Web Developer, Adobe Systems From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 19:05:18 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 20:05:18 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie References: Message-ID: <001b01c07c01$73154840$0101a8c0@gandalf> Hi David good question... I dropped in here a few weeks ago. I managed to connect myself to the CVS server and downloaded the stuff in there. (I tried to wrote a step-by-step about it). And thats where I am now. I have both Delphi 5 Enterprise and CBuilder 5 (no experience with C though). I am too looking for some general desriptions, architecture, wish-list, status list or whatever. Is there anyone in here who's got this documents? Or can we find em somewhere in the CVS? Peter Snoek - The Netherlands ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Twyerould" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 5:38 AM Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > Hi! I've just joined the Sword developer forum and I'm interested in > helping out with a Java version of Sword. I have a few questions that > perhaps someone could help me with. > > (1). what is the functionality that sword is trying to provide? Is there > are requirements document or a list of desired functions somewhere? > (2). what is the architecture/design that is being followed? Is there a > spec or a description of the current implementation? Is there any > documentation on the file formats? > > I'm keen to help out with the Java version of Sword, I am an experienced > Java developer (last 4 years in enterprise and web development). Is anyone > heading up this development? Troy put me on to the CVS server where there > is the beginnings of a port of the C++ code to Java - but it looks like > there is a lot to be done..? > > By the way, is there an online archive somewhere of this forum so I don't > have to ask silly questions that have already been answered? > > Regards, > David Twyerould > e-Business Solutions Development (South.), IBM Global Services (CS13). > Australia > Ph: +61-3-96270345 Mobile: +61-0412-265186 > Notes: David Twyerould/Australia/IBM Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com > "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 21:24:17 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:24:17 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie References: <001b01c07c01$73154840$0101a8c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <3A5E2481.BBF899AF@crosswire.org> Have you guys worked thru the api primer on the website? http://www.crosswire.org/sword/ then Development, then API Primer There is some stuff this might be a little old, but is about 90% accurate :) I would then step thru the examples, tests, utilities directories. -Troy. Peter Snoek wrote: > > Hi David > > good question... > I dropped in here a few weeks ago. I managed to connect myself to the > CVS server and downloaded the stuff in there. (I tried to wrote a > step-by-step > about it). > > And thats where I am now. I have both Delphi 5 Enterprise and CBuilder 5 > (no experience with C though). I am too looking for some general > desriptions, > architecture, wish-list, status list or whatever. > > Is there anyone in here who's got this documents? > Or can we find em somewhere in the CVS? > > Peter Snoek - The Netherlands > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Twyerould" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 5:38 AM > Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > > > Hi! I've just joined the Sword developer forum and I'm interested in > > helping out with a Java version of Sword. I have a few questions that > > perhaps someone could help me with. > > > > (1). what is the functionality that sword is trying to provide? Is there > > are requirements document or a list of desired functions somewhere? > > (2). what is the architecture/design that is being followed? Is there a > > spec or a description of the current implementation? Is there any > > documentation on the file formats? > > > > I'm keen to help out with the Java version of Sword, I am an experienced > > Java developer (last 4 years in enterprise and web development). Is anyone > > heading up this development? Troy put me on to the CVS server where there > > is the beginnings of a port of the C++ code to Java - but it looks like > > there is a lot to be done..? > > > > By the way, is there an online archive somewhere of this forum so I don't > > have to ask silly questions that have already been answered? > > > > Regards, > > David Twyerould > > e-Business Solutions Development (South.), IBM Global Services (CS13). > > Australia > > Ph: +61-3-96270345 Mobile: +61-0412-265186 > > Notes: David Twyerould/Australia/IBM Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com > > "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) > > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 22:21:55 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 23:21:55 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie References: <001b01c07c01$73154840$0101a8c0@gandalf> <3A5E2481.BBF899AF@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <002001c07c1c$e8324130$0101a8c0@gandalf> Hi Troy, thanks for the direction. I will experiment with the API. I think I have seen a delphi 'port' of the API. Is this correct? Do you think it is usefull to write an delphi/pascal 'howto' to get newbies (like myself) going on in the project? Or should I focus on a specific programming issue? Any ideas are welcome. I will experiment further with the examples and tests, and see if I can compile the thing in CBuilder 5 and Delphi 5. kind regards, Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Troy A. Griffitts" To: Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 10:24 PM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > Have you guys worked thru the api primer on the website? > > http://www.crosswire.org/sword/ > then Development, then API Primer > > There is some stuff this might be a little old, but is about 90% > accurate :) > I would then step thru the examples, tests, utilities directories. > > -Troy. > > > > Peter Snoek wrote: > > > > Hi David > > > > good question... > > I dropped in here a few weeks ago. I managed to connect myself to the > > CVS server and downloaded the stuff in there. (I tried to wrote a > > step-by-step > > about it). > > > > And thats where I am now. I have both Delphi 5 Enterprise and CBuilder 5 > > (no experience with C though). I am too looking for some general > > desriptions, > > architecture, wish-list, status list or whatever. > > > > Is there anyone in here who's got this documents? > > Or can we find em somewhere in the CVS? > > > > Peter Snoek - The Netherlands > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David Twyerould" > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 5:38 AM > > Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > > > > > Hi! I've just joined the Sword developer forum and I'm interested in > > > helping out with a Java version of Sword. I have a few questions that > > > perhaps someone could help me with. > > > > > > (1). what is the functionality that sword is trying to provide? Is there > > > are requirements document or a list of desired functions somewhere? > > > (2). what is the architecture/design that is being followed? Is there a > > > spec or a description of the current implementation? Is there any > > > documentation on the file formats? > > > > > > I'm keen to help out with the Java version of Sword, I am an experienced > > > Java developer (last 4 years in enterprise and web development). Is anyone > > > heading up this development? Troy put me on to the CVS server where there > > > is the beginnings of a port of the C++ code to Java - but it looks like > > > there is a lot to be done..? > > > > > > By the way, is there an online archive somewhere of this forum so I don't > > > have to ask silly questions that have already been answered? > > > > > > Regards, > > > David Twyerould > > > e-Business Solutions Development (South.), IBM Global Services (CS13). > > > Australia > > > Ph: +61-3-96270345 Mobile: +61-0412-265186 > > > Notes: David Twyerould/Australia/IBM Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com > > > "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) > > > > > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 22:34:41 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 15:34:41 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie References: <001b01c07c01$73154840$0101a8c0@gandalf> <3A5E2481.BBF899AF@crosswire.org> <002001c07c1c$e8324130$0101a8c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <3A5E3501.8FDFFA09@crosswire.org> for CBuilder5 open: sword/apps/windoze/CBuilder5/biblecs/swordprj.bpg This should build the entire environment with the main windows executable. It separates the api into a lib, so you should be able to add your own exe experiments easily. I think there is a utilities/build... something for building some of the utilities as commandline tools. -Troy. PS. I'm outta here for the weekend. I'll try to check mail... Peter Snoek wrote: > > Hi Troy, > > thanks for the direction. > I will experiment with the API. > I think I have seen a delphi 'port' of the API. Is this correct? > > Do you think it is usefull to write an delphi/pascal 'howto' to > get newbies (like myself) going on in the project? > Or should I focus on a specific programming issue? > Any ideas are welcome. > > I will experiment further with the examples and tests, and see > if I can compile the thing in CBuilder 5 and Delphi 5. > > kind regards, > > Peter > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Troy A. Griffitts" > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 10:24 PM > Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > > > Have you guys worked thru the api primer on the website? > > > > http://www.crosswire.org/sword/ > > then Development, then API Primer > > > > There is some stuff this might be a little old, but is about 90% > > accurate :) > > I would then step thru the examples, tests, utilities directories. > > > > -Troy. > > > > > > > > Peter Snoek wrote: > > > > > > Hi David > > > > > > good question... > > > I dropped in here a few weeks ago. I managed to connect myself to the > > > CVS server and downloaded the stuff in there. (I tried to wrote a > > > step-by-step > > > about it). > > > > > > And thats where I am now. I have both Delphi 5 Enterprise and CBuilder 5 > > > (no experience with C though). I am too looking for some general > > > desriptions, > > > architecture, wish-list, status list or whatever. > > > > > > Is there anyone in here who's got this documents? > > > Or can we find em somewhere in the CVS? > > > > > > Peter Snoek - The Netherlands > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "David Twyerould" > > > To: > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 5:38 AM > > > Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > > > > > > > Hi! I've just joined the Sword developer forum and I'm interested in > > > > helping out with a Java version of Sword. I have a few questions that > > > > perhaps someone could help me with. > > > > > > > > (1). what is the functionality that sword is trying to provide? Is > there > > > > are requirements document or a list of desired functions somewhere? > > > > (2). what is the architecture/design that is being followed? Is there > a > > > > spec or a description of the current implementation? Is there any > > > > documentation on the file formats? > > > > > > > > I'm keen to help out with the Java version of Sword, I am an > experienced > > > > Java developer (last 4 years in enterprise and web development). Is > anyone > > > > heading up this development? Troy put me on to the CVS server where > there > > > > is the beginnings of a port of the C++ code to Java - but it looks > like > > > > there is a lot to be done..? > > > > > > > > By the way, is there an online archive somewhere of this forum so I > don't > > > > have to ask silly questions that have already been answered? > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > David Twyerould > > > > e-Business Solutions Development (South.), IBM Global Services > (CS13). > > > > Australia > > > > Ph: +61-3-96270345 Mobile: +61-0412-265186 > > > > Notes: David Twyerould/Australia/IBM Internet: > dtwy@au1.ibm.com > > > > "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) > > > > > > > > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 02:44:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (David Twyerould) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 13:44:34 +1100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie Message-ID: Troy, the API primer looks good if you're working with the C/C++ code and the C/C++ code API seems fairly complete. But I'm not sure it helps people working with other programming languages (eg Pascal/Java etc) that much though. For example, the java port has a lot missing so someone wanting to work on this is going to need a lot more basic understanding of how things work "under the covers" - file formats and the like. There don't appear to be a lot of comments in the C/C++ code to explain what is going on. Is it expected (or required) that all ports will (or should) work the same way as the C code? Is anyone currently working on the Java code port? If so, how can I help?? Regards & God bless... David Twyerould Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 11:33:13 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:33:13 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] portability Message-ID: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> Hi, The debian packages are coming along, but this issue has come up. At the moment you need to choose the platform manually. But when the debian autobuilders try to build the package they will need to determine it themselves. One option is autoconf (you don't have to have automake as well so the build system can stay virtually the same). I'll probably have a go at it over the weekend, but I was just wondering if anyone had any thoughts first? Daniel ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Date sent: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 16:33:31 -0800 From: Ron Farrer To: Daniel Glassey Subject: your packages Hi; I've looked over your packages and each has a couple minor things that need to be changed. Let's start with sword. I have sword-1.5.1a, is this the latest version? The first thing that needs to be changed is the makefile. It assumes the system is intel, always. This will break on other platforms, especially with the autobuild scripts (most archs are using autobuild scripts). You can change it to automatically determine the platform and add entries for all of them (alpha, sparc, powerpc, arm, etc) which would be easiest or convert over to autoconf (probably better for long run). Which ever you decide is up to you and I'd suggest sending your patches upstream so they may be included in future releases.=20 Regards, Ron --=20 Email: , Home: Alpha News Network: ------- End of forwarded message ------- _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 11:33:16 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:33:16 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] module format Message-ID: <3A5EEB7C.19165.14FC245F@localhost> I've started packing some modules for Debian, but it's rather tedious by hand (especially trying to extract the copyright from amongst other info). I'm sure it could be automated, but the modules would need to be standardised. At the moment different files are included in the module directory depending on the modules, readmes, copyright stuff, ... I would propose: (1) only 1 copy of .conf - in mods.d (it's too confusing if there is one in the module directory as well.) (2)a separate directory doc/ where any extra documentation for the module goes. (3)a copyright directory where the copyright goes in a file (4)_only_ module data files go in the module directory modules/// (5)the copyright could also be a specific part of .conf Thoughts? Daniel P.S. I've had a quick look at the jsword files and am thinking about adding a pkgType tgz for module.tar.gz. (it helps for making debs if the source is like that) using the java tar module http://www.trustice.com/java/tar/ (www.gjt.org where the files are is down at the mo though :/ ) but I'm not sure how to intergrate it, though it ought to be similar to ZipStream, and don't have anything set up to test it on. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 14:28:07 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Tsoloane Moahloli) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 16:28:07 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings In-Reply-To: <3A5A15B9.D019F29F@eireneh.com> Message-ID: Hmm Okay, I have implemented basic VerseKey functionality and have gotten this to provide the right output using your RawVerse class. It is still fairly limited in terms of the following: Currently only doing one verse at time display (Should change over the weekend) Needs to be more flexible in terms of how requests for verses are input. Anyway, I will see how much I can do over the weekend and send the files over later. Oh, Joe, you did send me the files earlier, I just didn't get around to interfacing with then in anyway until now. Cheers, have a good weekend and God bless Y'all T On 08-Jan-2001 Joe Walker wrote: > Tsoloane Moahloli wrote: >> >> Hi Joe, >> >> Just to say, I like your files. > > ... > > Assuming this was a request not a complement :) ... > I've attached the .java in question, and in the next few days > I'll update my web site with the latest release which puts that in > a servlet. > > Joe. -- An error can never become true however many times you repeat it. The truth can never be wrong, even if no one hears it. - Mahatma Gandhi Tsoloane Moahloli Zen Computing (Pty)Ltd. phone +27 11 706 7054 email: tsoloane@zen.co.za URL: http://www.zen.co.za From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 18:23:59 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joe Walker) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 18:23:59 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie References: Message-ID: <3A5F4BBF.86A26513@eireneh.com> Hi, There is a nearly complete Java servlet project. It read Sword files and has the basics of a simple GUI too. The source (GPL) is available: http://www.eireneh.com/package.tar.gz In the next week or so I should have the servlet version on the web site working. Joe David Twyerould wrote: > > Troy, the API primer looks good if you're working with the C/C++ code and > the C/C++ code API seems fairly complete. But I'm not sure it helps people > working with other programming languages (eg Pascal/Java etc) that much > though. For example, the java port has a lot missing so someone wanting to > work on this is going to need a lot more basic understanding of how things > work "under the covers" - file formats and the like. There don't appear to > be a lot of comments in the C/C++ code to explain what is going on. > > Is it expected (or required) that all ports will (or should) work the same > way as the C code? > > Is anyone currently working on the Java code port? If so, how can I help?? > > Regards & God bless... > David Twyerould > Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com > "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 21:43:20 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Nathan) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 23:43:20 +0200 Subject: [sword-devel] Corrupt Bible texts in other languages!! In-Reply-To: <3A5F4BBF.86A26513@eireneh.com> Message-ID: <000701c07ce0$ae792f70$02801c0a@hsjnbdns.jnb.sap-ag.de> Good day everyone I have been looking at some of the Bibles in the other languages. I have noticed that the text in many of them have characters missing!! Example 1: Vietnamese, Genesis 1:3 It reads (in 'English'): "c Chuùa Trôøi phaùn raèng: ..." It should read: "Ñöùc Chuùa Trôøi phaùn raèng: ..." The first 3 characters are missing. Example 2: Turkish, Matthew 1:1 It reads (in 'English'): "brahim oðlu ..." It should read: "Ýbrahim oðlu ..." The first character is missing. Example 3: Romanian, Genesis 1:7 It reads: "i Dumnezeu a f¹cut întinderea..." The first character is missing. Example 4: Hungarian, Genesis 1:3 It reads: "s monda Isten..." It should read: "És monda Isten..." The first character is missing. Conclusion: If the verse started with characters of value > 127, these characters were thrown away. I have checked these with other Bibles on the Internet, and have confirmed that this is a problem. This means that the web interfaces like Diatheke, etc. are also giving out "chopped-off" verses in their Bibles. Could this have been the conversion tool from Online Bible? Regards, nathan http://www.nathan.co.za From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 13 01:56:47 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jen (a.k.a. GLAZE) Noe) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 17:56:47 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Message-Id: <12010112.64606@webbox.com> Message-ID: <200101130148.SAA09096@www.crosswire.org> unsubscribe Under the Mercy, Jen (a.k.a. GLAZE) Noe glaze@geek.com ------ Geek.com WebBox - http://www.geek.com A free service provided by WebBox - http://webbox.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 13 07:56:52 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 00:56:52 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Corrupt Bible texts in other languages!! References: <000701c07ce0$ae792f70$02801c0a@hsjnbdns.jnb.sap-ag.de> Message-ID: <3A600A44.41453F03@crosswire.org> Nathan, Thank you. These modules are hard for us to verify, since we do not personally understand these languages. You have given a good point, though. We could have verified them with another online version of the same text. Thanks again. I am still kindof hoping that someone intimate with these languages will take ownership of their maintenance. -Troy. Nathan wrote: > > Good day everyone > > I have been looking at some of the Bibles in the other > languages. I have noticed that the text in many of them > have characters missing!! > > Example 1: Vietnamese, Genesis 1:3 > It reads (in 'English'): "c Chuùa Trôøi phaùn raèng: ..." > It should read: "Ñöùc Chuùa Trôøi phaùn raèng: ..." > The first 3 characters are missing. > > Example 2: Turkish, Matthew 1:1 > It reads (in 'English'): "brahim oðlu ..." > It should read: "Ýbrahim oðlu ..." > The first character is missing. > > Example 3: Romanian, Genesis 1:7 > It reads: "i Dumnezeu a f¹cut întinderea..." > The first character is missing. > > Example 4: Hungarian, Genesis 1:3 > It reads: "s monda Isten..." > It should read: "És monda Isten..." > The first character is missing. > > Conclusion: If the verse started with characters of value > 127, > these characters were thrown away. > > I have checked these with other Bibles on the Internet, > and have confirmed that this is a problem. This means that > the web interfaces like Diatheke, etc. are also giving out > "chopped-off" verses in their Bibles. > > Could this have been the conversion tool from Online Bible? > > Regards, > nathan > http://www.nathan.co.za From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 13 13:23:09 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Bill Schuh) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 05:23:09 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Another Newbie....... Message-ID: <015d01c07d63$fcd314a0$f1c8fea9@laptop> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_015A_01C07D20.EA7F2340 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have just joined as well... I am not a programmer - however I do enjoy playing with beta software = and finding bugs. What can I do to help??? Also - where do I send ideas on product development or changes?? And one last question - where do the unlock keys get applied for locked = modules?? Thanks a million...... Bill <>< ------=_NextPart_000_015A_01C07D20.EA7F2340 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have just joined as = well...
 
I am not a programmer - however I do = enjoy playing=20 with beta software and finding bugs.
 
What can I do to help???
 
Also - where do I send ideas on product = development=20 or changes??
 
And one last question - where do the = unlock keys=20 get applied for locked modules??
 
Thanks a million......
 
Bill = <><
------=_NextPart_000_015A_01C07D20.EA7F2340-- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 14 13:26:22 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Martin Gruner) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 14:26:22 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] portability In-Reply-To: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> References: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> Message-ID: <01011414262203.00558@martin> Why not change the whole make system to autoconf/automake? We use it in bibletime, and IMO it makes maintaining more easy. Probably it would make porting sword / building on different architectures more easy? Maybe the sword cvs package should be split into (1) core lib and documentation (used by other projects), (2) module making and misc tools and (3) apps (sword for windows and other apps). Maybe a new package could be set up for module development. (or package 2 extended for this use) Martin On Freitag, 12. Januar 2001 12:33, you wrote: > Hi, > The debian packages are coming along, but this issue has come up. At > the moment you need to choose the platform manually. But when the > debian autobuilders try to build the package they will need to > determine it themselves. > One option is autoconf (you don't have to have automake as well so > the build system can stay virtually the same). I'll probably have a go > at it over the weekend, but I was just wondering if anyone had any > thoughts first? > > Daniel From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 15 01:43:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Bill Schuh) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 17:43:01 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] portability References: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> <01011414262203.00558@martin> Message-ID: <002901c07e94$8184d680$f1c8fea9@laptop> THANK YOU AGAIN!!!! A couple of quick questions: 1) What time do the lesson begin? 2) I know the Scouts need a face mask, water-proof gloves and gogles - do they need anything else? Because of people like you these Scouts have the opportunity to experience many new things that they would not otherwise be able to afford...... Bill Schuh Pack 585 wlschuh@yahoo.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Martin Gruner To: Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 5:26 AM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] portability > Why not change the whole make system to autoconf/automake? We use it in > bibletime, and IMO it makes maintaining more easy. Probably it would make > porting sword / building on different architectures more easy? > > Maybe the sword cvs package should be split into (1) core lib and > documentation (used by other projects), (2) module making and misc tools and > (3) apps (sword for windows and other apps). Maybe a new package could be set > up for module development. (or package 2 extended for this use) > > Martin > > On Freitag, 12. Januar 2001 12:33, you wrote: > > Hi, > > The debian packages are coming along, but this issue has come up. At > > the moment you need to choose the platform manually. But when the > > debian autobuilders try to build the package they will need to > > determine it themselves. > > One option is autoconf (you don't have to have automake as well so > > the build system can stay virtually the same). I'll probably have a go > > at it over the weekend, but I was just wondering if anyone had any > > thoughts first? > > > > Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 15 01:45:29 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Bill Schuh) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 17:45:29 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] portability References: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> <01011414262203.00558@martin> Message-ID: <002f01c07e94$d7fb3cc0$f1c8fea9@laptop> SO SORRY FOLKS - please ignore the las post from me - it was sent on the wrong address.... PLEASE FORGIVE ME - An old fool...... Bill <>< ----- Original Message ----- From: Martin Gruner To: Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 5:26 AM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] portability > Why not change the whole make system to autoconf/automake? We use it in > bibletime, and IMO it makes maintaining more easy. Probably it would make > porting sword / building on different architectures more easy? > > Maybe the sword cvs package should be split into (1) core lib and > documentation (used by other projects), (2) module making and misc tools and > (3) apps (sword for windows and other apps). Maybe a new package could be set > up for module development. (or package 2 extended for this use) > > Martin > > On Freitag, 12. Januar 2001 12:33, you wrote: > > Hi, > > The debian packages are coming along, but this issue has come up. At > > the moment you need to choose the platform manually. But when the > > debian autobuilders try to build the package they will need to > > determine it themselves. > > One option is autoconf (you don't have to have automake as well so > > the build system can stay virtually the same). I'll probably have a go > > at it over the weekend, but I was just wondering if anyone had any > > thoughts first? > > > > Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 15 07:15:14 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Robyn Manning) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 17:45:14 +1030 Subject: [sword-devel] What is there to be done? Message-ID: <01011517451401.01149@kanga> Hi all How can I help? Is there any web admin that needs doing? How do I unlock a module - unencrypt a module? I have NIV installed but can't read anything, I've installed the key from within Bibletime. Robyn From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 15 11:32:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:32:34 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] portability In-Reply-To: <01011414262203.00558@martin> References: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> Message-ID: <3A62DFD2.32624.6CB6EE@localhost> On 14 Jan 2001, at 14:26, Martin Gruner sent forth the message: > Why not change the whole make system to autoconf/automake? We use it in > bibletime, and IMO it makes maintaining more easy. Probably it would make > porting sword / building on different architectures more easy? autoconf is fine. I tried automake before, but it is very messy when you have lots of sub and sub-sub directories in the source tree. The current build system works fine apart from autoconfiguration which is what autoconf is for, so it's probably best to say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". > Maybe the sword cvs package should be split into (1) core lib and > documentation (used by other projects), (2) module making and misc tools and (3) > apps (sword for windows and other apps). Maybe a new package could be set up for > module development. (or package 2 extended for this use) This I would like to see though. The apps/windoze directory is over 5MB and is pretty irrelevant for linux develpment. Bibletime, the KDE frontend is in a seperate cvs archive, maybe the windows frontend should be the same? Same for diatheke. (2) is probably useful in the main archive unless, as you say, a new package is set up for module dev. Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 15 10:44:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Uwe Koloska) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:44:46 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] portability In-Reply-To: <002f01c07e94$d7fb3cc0$f1c8fea9@laptop> References: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> <01011414262203.00558@martin> <002f01c07e94$d7fb3cc0$f1c8fea9@laptop> Message-ID: <01011511444600.01087@bilbo> You wrote on Montag, 15. Januar 2001 02:45: >SO SORRY FOLKS - please ignore the las post from me - it was sent on the >wrong address.... > >PLEASE FORGIVE ME - > >An old fool...... > >Bill <>< Please learn from this, to only cite the part of the message that you need for your answer. If you have cited the message at the top and tried to delete all unwanted stuff, you have seen that the topic is _very_ different. So folks: Outlook is a mess -- but if you want / need to continue using it, rework the settings!!! (for example: no html mail, cite message above, ...) For german people there is a good OE FAQ at http://www.trionet.de/~florenzvillegas/OE-FAQ Thank you Uwe -- mailto:koloska@rcs.urz.tu-dresden.de http://rcswww.urz.tu-dresden.de/~koloska/ -- -- right now the web page is in german only but this will change as time goes by ;-) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 17 03:18:07 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Geoffrey W Hastings) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 19:18:07 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Edit Notes. Message-ID: <20010116.191936.-552163.5.geoffreyhastings@juno.com> Did the delete note ever get changed to prevent accidental deletion. I was working on a study last week during my lunch break. I was going back and forth adding many verse references to my note. Scince I only have 30 minutes to eat and work on my notes I was trying to work quickly. 3 times in a half hour I deleted my work by letting go of the mouse button to soon.. Another nice feature would be the ability to keep your edit note window open while using the program. This would allow you to keep working without closing, saving and returning to open and edit over and over. I was thinking today that along with the personal notes tab it might be a nice feature to have a Sermon notes tab. Many pastors now prepare their sermon outlines using BIble software and could easily post them on their church web site for members to paste into the appropriate place in there Sermon note. This would allow them to not be mixed with their own personal notes. For an example here is a list of verses that could be copied and pasted in at John 3:3 . They are to be read straight through pausing at each double spaced line. I read them to my junior high class this way to show them how the Bible speaks of our salvation. I plan to set these up with a list at the top of all the verses as a links. SALVATION John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 1 John 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. 1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 1 John 4:1| We love him, because he first loved us. 1 John 4:14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. 1 John 5:11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 1 Timothy 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. Luke 12:15 And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth. Mark 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Acts 16:30 … What must I do to be saved? Acts 16:31 ... Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Galatians 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Ephesians 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast. Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. 2 Timothy 3:15 …. thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. Hebrews 10:38 Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. Isaiah 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. Matthew 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. 1 John 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. 1 Thessalonians 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, Hebrews 2:3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 5:8 But God commends his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 1 Corinthians 15:3 … Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 1 Corinthians 15:4 And … he was buried, and … he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: Romans 10:9 … if you shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in you heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved. Romans 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Romans 10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. Romans 10:12 ¶ For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. Luke 18:13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. Psalms 25:18 Look upon mine affliction and my pain; and forgive all my sins. Luke 15:10 Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth. Luke 10:20 Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven. Psalms 13:5 But I have trusted in thy mercy; my heart shall rejoice in thy salvation. Psalms 16:11 Thou wilt shew me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore. Psalms 30:5 For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favour is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning. Psalms 35:9 And my soul shall be joyful in the LORD: it shall rejoice in his salvation. Psalms 27:1 The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the LORD is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid? Psalms 90:14 O satisfy us early with thy mercy; that we may rejoice and be glad all our days. Proverbs 3:1 My son, forget not my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments: Proverbs 3:2 For length of days, and long life, and peace, shall they add to thee. Nehemiah 8:10 … for the joy of the LORD is your strength. Psalms 119:165 Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them. Isaiah 26:3 Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee. Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: Galatians 1:3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, John 14:27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. 2 Corinthians 13:11 … Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you. Philippians 4:4 Rejoice in the Lord alway: and again I say, Rejoice. Philippians 4:6 Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. Philippians 4:7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus. 1 John 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. John 20:21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 17 05:13:18 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 21:13:18 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Getting willing people to work! Message-ID: <003801c08044$62da9ec0$9a8e2d3f@family> Dear Everyone, I hope that everyone at least got to take a little break on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day! I have sitting here in my mail folders two e-mails from people that have openly stated on the sword-devel mailinglist they would like to help with Sword in some manner and both of them have not received any answer about how they could help. To me, people willing to help need to be put to work! :) How do we need to treat people that are new and willing to help? Should we send a little bit of a questionnaire like what are their coding abilities, and talents that will be an aid to our project and then plug them in? What are other peoples ideas, I was going to just send this to Troy but thought maybe other people would have some ideas also! So lets start throwing those ideas around! Your Brother, Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 17 12:22:37 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 12:22:37 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] Getting willing people to work! In-Reply-To: <003801c08044$62da9ec0$9a8e2d3f@family> Message-ID: On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Jonathan Hughes wrote: > I hope that everyone at least got to take a little break on Martin > Luther King, Jr. Day! It's not celebrated here in old England. > ... I have sitting here in my mail folders two e-mails > from people that have openly stated on the sword-devel mailinglist they > would like to help with Sword in some manner and both of them have not > received any answer about how they could help. To me, people willing to help > need to be put to work! :) How do we need to treat people that are new and > willing to help? Should we send a little bit of a questionnaire like what > are their coding abilities, and talents that will be an aid to our project > and then plug them in? What are other peoples ideas, I was going to just > send this to Troy but thought maybe other people would have some ideas also! > So lets start throwing those ideas around! I recall that at least one of the recent volunteers said they were not a programmer. However, everyone can be a tester. Problems need to be reported. Whether they are functional problems causing program crashes or idiocyncracies of the interface(s) all need to be reported. They'll not get fixed. Documentation needs reviewing, split infinitives need repairing, spelling misteaks corrected, better explanations written. Modules need reviewing (but as was pointed out recently not everyone involved knows Vietnamese). Long time ago Prof Peter Brown suggested that test installations should be made by novices wilst the program author was on holiday. This tested the installation instructions and the ease of installation. For details you can read "Writing Interactive Compilers and Interpreters ". For an example of how to write good technical explanations read the same book. He suggests that proram authors should give a beer to the first person who finds a particular bug. (Many commerical software producers would have to buy a brewery.) That it's now over the age of maturity, originally in 1979, and hasn't been better nor sadly the lessons learnt means that there's a long way to go. (With many more breweries being required than in 1979.) Brown also presents the 14 deadly sins of program writing, which is a humourous compendium of typical programmer's mistakes. How's about collating a regression test suite? Something that a non-programming volunteer could do. Running QA tests on new releases. Again something that a non-techncial volunteer could do. Writing, reviewing, editing documentation. The tasks are legion. Just needs someone to volunteer to compile the list. Note that many of the things I've brainstormed are not one-offs but are necessary and vital aspects of the project. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 17 14:45:39 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 07:45:39 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Getting willing people to work! In-Reply-To: <003801c08044$62da9ec0$9a8e2d3f@family> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010117073915.00a97250@mail.dancris.com> At 09:13 PM 1/16/2001 -0800, Jonathan Hughes wrote: > How do we need to treat people that are new and >willing to help? Should we send a little bit of a questionnaire like what >are their coding abilities, and talents that will be an aid to our project >and then plug them in? What are other peoples ideas, I was going to just >send this to Troy but thought maybe other people would have some ideas also! >So lets start throwing those ideas around! Along with abilities, the amount of time and the duration they are willing to work on a project is important. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 18 21:50:11 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Palumbo, William) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 13:50:11 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Getting willing people to work! Message-ID: <824EAE80328AD311B2590090276267820157F584@INFOSERVER> I would have to agree with Trevor. Anyone can be a tester. It would help if we had more direction. A test script, task list, etc. Something a bit more comprehensive than we currently have. Even if a dozen programmers landed on our doorstep tomorrow, what would they do? What is priority? Where is the greatest need, etc. Essentially we just need some solid project management. William > -----Original Message----- > From: Trevor Jenkins [mailto:trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 4:23 AM > To: sword-devel@crosswire.org > Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Getting willing people to work! > > > On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Jonathan Hughes wrote: > > > I hope that everyone at least got to take a little > break on Martin > > Luther King, Jr. Day! > > It's not celebrated here in old England. > > > ... I have sitting here in my mail folders two e-mails > > from people that have openly stated on the sword-devel > mailinglist they > > would like to help with Sword in some manner and both of > them have not > > received any answer about how they could help. To me, > people willing to help > > need to be put to work! :) How do we need to treat people > that are new and > > willing to help? Should we send a little bit of a > questionnaire like what > > are their coding abilities, and talents that will be an aid > to our project > > and then plug them in? What are other peoples ideas, I was > going to just > > send this to Troy but thought maybe other people would have > some ideas also! > > So lets start throwing those ideas around! > > I recall that at least one of the recent volunteers said they > were not a > programmer. However, everyone can be a tester. Problems need to be > reported. Whether they are functional problems causing > program crashes or > idiocyncracies of the interface(s) all need to be reported. > They'll not > get fixed. Documentation needs reviewing, split infinitives need > repairing, spelling misteaks corrected, better explanations > written. Modules need reviewing (but as was pointed out recently not > everyone involved knows Vietnamese). > > Long time ago Prof Peter Brown suggested that test > installations should be > made by novices wilst the program author was on holiday. This > tested the > installation instructions and the ease of installation. For > details you > can read "Writing Interactive Compilers and Interpreters ". > For an example > of how to write good technical explanations read the same book. He > suggests that proram authors should give a beer to the first > person who > finds a particular bug. (Many commerical software producers > would have to > buy a brewery.) That it's now over the age of maturity, originally in > 1979, and hasn't been better nor sadly the lessons learnt means that > there's a long way to go. (With many more breweries being > required than in > 1979.) Brown also presents the 14 deadly sins of program > writing, which is > a humourous compendium of typical programmer's mistakes. > > How's about collating a regression test suite? Something that a > non-programming volunteer could do. Running QA tests on new > releases. Again something that a non-techncial volunteer could > do. Writing, reviewing, editing documentation. The tasks are > legion. Just > needs someone to volunteer to compile the list. Note that many of the > things I've brainstormed are not one-offs but are necessary and vital > aspects of the project. > > Regards, Trevor > > British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a > living language. > Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British > government now! > > -- > > <>< Re: deemed! > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 18 20:52:27 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 21:52:27 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword CD Message-ID: <01011821522700.14014@joachim> Hi Troy! I updated the Sword CD a little bit (new KDE 2.01 sources in GOODIES/misc.linux, removed old KDE-1.91 sources, uploaded current BibleTime 0.25 and 0.31 binary and source packages, removed /sword-1.51/ and replaced it by /sword-1.51a/), removed bibletime-0.31pre from the BETA directory). I tried to get gnomesword, but I can't find a program on the server to get file using the http protocoll. Is there any? I hope it's okay for you that I made changes on the CD, that's why I'm sending this eMail. -- Joachim BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 20 05:15:50 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Robyn Manning) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 15:45:50 +1030 Subject: [sword-devel] hello? Message-ID: <01012015455000.01115@kanga> Hi all Is someone going to reply to my previous message? Robyn From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 20 07:03:25 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 23:03:25 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] hello? References: <01012015455000.01115@kanga> Message-ID: <001901c082af$1cbfe680$6a8a2d3f@family> Robyn, I am very, very sorry Robyn, that no one replied, it is not because we don't care but that right now we do not have the infrastructure setup yet to really get volunteers into positions. I am hoping in the future to have the time to head up the volunteer coordination. We are talking about redesigning the Sword Project web page, is that in your area of expertise? Could you please answer the following questions to help me better understand where you can help out with the Sword Project: Your Name: Your primary e-mail address (one that you check frequently): Your Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help the Sword Project, the years of experience and in your opinion our level of competency and examples of your work: i.e. HTML programming, 2 years, Intermediate, http://www.whatever.com/whatever/ Your non-Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help the Sword Project (editing, proofreading, writing, etc.): Approximate number of hours a week you could work on projects for Sword: Any other information that would help us place you in a place that you will enjoy and do a good job in: I hope this is not too much trouble but it will help out a great deal! Thank you so much for your willingness to help! You can send the answers directly to my e-mail: jhughes@crosswire.org In Christ, Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 20 07:07:39 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 23:07:39 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Another Newbie....... References: <015d01c07d63$fcd314a0$f1c8fea9@laptop> Message-ID: <002401c082af$aef42f20$6a8a2d3f@family> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C0826C.9ED1C3C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bill, Thank you for your willingness to serve and help the Sword Project = could you answer the following questions to help me understand where you = could help in the project: Your Name: Your Birthday (only the month and day if you don't want to say how old = you are, I want to be able to say happy birthday when it is your = "special" day! :) ): Your primary e-mail address (one that you check frequently): Your Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help the = Sword Project, the years of experience and in your opinion our level of = competency and examples of your work: i.e. HTML programming, 2 years, Intermediate, http://www.whatever.com/whatever/ Your non-Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help = the Sword Project (editing, proofreading, writing, etc.): Approximate number of hours a week you could work on projects for Sword: Any other information that would help us place you in a place that you = will enjoy and do a good job in: Thanks for taking the time to do this! You can send your response = directly to me: jhughes@crosswire.org In Christ, Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C0826C.9ED1C3C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bill,
 
    Thank you for your willingness to = serve and=20 help the Sword Project could you answer the following questions to help = me=20 understand where you could help in the project:
 
Your Name:
Your Birthday (only the month and day if you don't = want to say=20 how old you are, I want to be able to say happy birthday when it is your = "special" day! :) ):

Your primary e-mail address (one that you = check=20 frequently):

Your Technical abilities that you would be willing = to use to=20 help the Sword
Project, the years of experience and in your opinion = our level=20 of competency
and examples of your work:
i.e. HTML programming, 2 = years,=20 Intermediate,
http://www.whatever.com/whatev= er/

Your=20 non-Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help = the
Sword=20 Project (editing, proofreading, writing, etc.):

Approximate = number of=20 hours a week you could work on projects for Sword:

Any other = information=20 that would help us place you in a place that you will
enjoy and do a = good job=20 in:
 
Thanks for taking the time to do this! You can send = your=20 response directly to me: jhughes@crosswire.org
 
In Christ,
Jonathan
jhughes@crosswire.org ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C0826C.9ED1C3C0-- From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 21 13:23:15 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Leon Brooks) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 21:23:15 +0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword CD References: <01011821522700.14014@joachim> Message-ID: <3A6AE2C3.5010009@brooks.fdns.net> Joachim Ansorg wrote: > Hi Troy! > > I updated the Sword CD a little bit (new KDE 2.01 sources in > GOODIES/misc.linux, removed old KDE-1.91 sources, uploaded current BibleTime > 0.25 and 0.31 binary and source packages, removed /sword-1.51/ and replaced > it by /sword-1.51a/), removed bibletime-0.31pre from the BETA directory). > > I tried to get gnomesword, but I can't find a program on the server to get > file using the http protocoll. Is there any? Try PUTting stuff, also; a common Unix program for fetching things (HTTP and FTP) is wget. To fetch a single file, use: wget http://website.name/path/to/file To fetch a whole directory tree: wget -r http://website.name/path/to/top/directory If there is no wget installed, you can use lynx like this: lynx -dump http://website.name/path/to/file >file To move a directory tree, archive it up at the source end, fetch it as above, and upack it on the target end. If you are using SecureShell to access the server, you can try: scp login@source:/path/to/file login@target: (use scp -r to take a whole directory tree). This has the added advantage of exposing neither content nor passwords during the transfer. If you are sending stuff from a Windows (hawk, spit) workstation to a Unix server, I use and recommend pscp.exe from the PuTTY website (search for that on google.com) at the Windows end. -- The man who doesn't read great books has no advantage over the man who can't read them. -- Mark Twain From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 00:20:54 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:20:54 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management Message-ID: <3A6B7CE6.167B8490@crosswire.org> Jonathan and others, Thanks again for your commitment and involvement with the project... > Hey, how are you doing? I hope everything is ok, I have not seen you > post things on the developers mailinglist in a long time, hope you are just > taking a well deserved vacation! :) Well, not exactly. I've been designing and leading the group developing the XML repository for GE and the first project to use the repository went online this week (3 months before our production deadline, which means we're feveroushly trying to optimize and debug code that we thought we'd have another few months to work on). My apologies for keeping up with sword. > I would like to ask you two things, about > organizing volunteers and the overall project management: > > 1. I am the kind of person that respects authority greatly and will not do > anything that undermines someone else's authority or areas under their > authority, so I would like to ask if it is ok with you that I do somethings > to organize volunteers and the overall project management, including > figuring out exactly what needs to be done, getting people to do some task > lists, documentation, and managing the volunteers and where they are > working, etc. This will all be of course with the advice and contribution of > the developers on the developers mailinglist, and you. But I see this needed > to sorely be done. I agree that we need some organization. Typically, though, there is someone who really has a desire to work on a particular area of the project (e.g. modules -Chris; KDE frontend -Joachim; Copyright stuff -you!; GNOME frontend- Terry; and so many others) and they lead their individual efforts. Maybe a bulletin board type of website for volunteers to go, where they might see who's doing what and who needs help... What do you think? I could help with a set of JSPs that write to our server's database where project leads could post project status and direction, or even actual tasks. > 2. Is it possible to setup a mailinglist to communicate and collaborate on > the new website design for Sword? I know you had concerns that you want the > website to be something that you are comfortable with the layout, design, > and the ability for someone to maintain it when the person doing it now has > to move on. I feel the best way to do this is setting up a mailinglist where > everyone can chat about it and start working out some of the details and > start coding the site all together as a community, including your input and > advice. This is apposed to people spending all the time to make an example > only for it to be rejected, or nothing done with it (as is what is happening > now), we need to develop it as a community. I have contacted the webmaster > of www.kde.org and asked him for some advice about redesigning an open > source projects website. I can share with you these ideas if you would like? What do you and everyone think about using our news server for this list? We had thought about moving the mailing list over to a news server sometime back, and had mixed sentiments. It would give us a great test to see how people like the news server paradigm. Thoughts? From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 00:26:45 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:26:45 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] CD image Message-ID: <3A6B7E45.866083EF@crosswire.org> New CD's are planning on being cut Tuesday. Please have all your updates in the ISO by Monday eve. Thanks! -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 06:03:08 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 23:03:08 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management In-Reply-To: <3A6B7CE6.167B8490@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010121223546.00aa71a0@mail.dancris.com> At 05:20 PM 1/21/2001 -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > Maybe a bulletin board type of website for >volunteers to go, where they might see who's doing what and who needs >help... What do you think? I could help with a set of JSPs that write >to our server's database where project leads could post project status >and direction, or even actual tasks. Having a place to see who is doing what and what help they could use would be nice. If the project leads could post info on what a person should look at; API, task specifications, sample files, and sections of code, so one is acquainted with the task, that would probably be useful. > > I have contacted the webmaster > > of www.kde.org and asked him for some advice about redesigning an open > > source projects website. I can share with you these ideas if you would > like? > >What do you and everyone think about using our news server for this >list? We had thought about moving the mailing list over to a news >server sometime back, and had mixed sentiments. It would give us a >great test to see how people like the news server paradigm. Thoughts? I don't use my news reader much. I like getting new posts as email. But, I do like going to a site and being able to search and view an archive of discussions with threads. If you can set up the news server to send new posts as email that would be great. I prefer each new post as a separate email and not a days worth as one digest. But if you can do both, you will make more people happy. I think egroups does all these things. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 07:21:33 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Robyn Manning) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:51:33 +1030 Subject: [sword-devel] hello? In-Reply-To: <001901c082af$1cbfe680$6a8a2d3f@family> References: <01012015455000.01115@kanga> <001901c082af$1cbfe680$6a8a2d3f@family> Message-ID: <01012217513300.01113@kanga> Hi Jonathan, Thanks for the reply, My name is Robyn Manning, birthday 6th April, 1966 and my email address is robynman@dove.net.au, my website is at http://www.robynman.mtx.net (due for upgrade shortly). I'm not a programmer. I'm a technician and at the moment I'm mainly teaching beginners courses in Microsoft and hopefully Linux. I can help with all the non technical stuff. Organising and writing documentation, proofreading etc. I can put about 5 hours a week into the project. In Christ Robyn On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 17:33, you wrote: > Robyn, > > I am very, very sorry Robyn, that no one replied, it is not because we > don't care but that right now we do not have the infrastructure setup yet > to really get volunteers into positions. I am hoping in the future to have > the time to head up the volunteer coordination. We are talking about > redesigning the Sword Project web page, is that in your area of expertise? > Could you please answer the following questions to help me better > understand where you can help out with the Sword Project: > > Your Name: > > Your primary e-mail address (one that you check frequently): > > Your Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help the Sword > Project, the years of experience and in your opinion our level of > competency and examples of your work: > i.e. HTML programming, 2 years, Intermediate, > http://www.whatever.com/whatever/ > > Your non-Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help the > Sword Project (editing, proofreading, writing, etc.): > > Approximate number of hours a week you could work on projects for Sword: > > Any other information that would help us place you in a place that you will > enjoy and do a good job in: > > > I hope this is not too much trouble but it will help out a great deal! > Thank you so much for your willingness to help! You can send the answers > directly to my e-mail: jhughes@crosswire.org > > In Christ, > Jonathan > jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 09:25:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 01:25:42 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] new/updated modules In-Reply-To: <01012217513300.01113@kanga> Message-ID: I uploaded some new modules to the site as well as updating those texts Nathan pointed out as corrupt with corrected versions. Here's the rundown, with module names in parentheses: Updated texts: Vietnamese (Viet) Turkish NT (Turkish) Romanian Cornilescu (RomCor) Hungarian Karoli (HunKar) 1917 JPS Tanakh (JPS) New texts: The Emphatic Diaglott (Diaglott) Montgomery New Testament (Montgomery) The Twentieth Century New Testament (Twenty) The Emphasized Bible by J. B. Rotherham (Rotherham) All are in the public domain or freely distributable. Enjoy. --Chris Little From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 12:20:00 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:20:00 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management References: <3A6B7CE6.167B8490@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <3A6C2570.D92B5093@bigfoot.com> "Troy A. Griffitts" wrote: > ... > Maybe a bulletin board type of website for > volunteers to go, where they might see who's doing what and who needs > help... What do you think? Haven't we already got that on SourceForge? > ... > What do you and everyone think about using our news server for this > list? We had thought about moving the mailing list over to a news > server sometime back, and had mixed sentiments. It would give us a > great test to see how people like the news server paradigm. Thoughts? Most people these days use a news-capable email client, so it shouldn't be a problem. I would suggest adding a crosswire.www or something like that for the requested forum for working on the web page, and also a crosswire.software.reference (moderated), for filing reference material like pseudo-FAQs. We do seem to get the same questions repeated fairly frequently. Maybe a news/email cross-posting gateway would be a good idea. Then people who like news can read it there, and people who like email can get it that way. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear P.S. I use a news proxy on my Linux box called leafnode , and it is pretty cool. It is as easy to configure as a news client, and gives me LAN-speed access to my newsgroups. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 13:33:26 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 13:33:26 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management In-Reply-To: <3A6C2570.D92B5093@bigfoot.com> Message-ID: <3A6C36A6.24690.19FA6910@localhost> On 22 Jan 2001, at 22:20, Paul Gear sent forth the message: > Maybe a news/email cross-posting gateway would be a good idea. Then > people who like news can read it there, and people who like email can > get it that way. That would be great :) For whoever is dealing with that, here's a Mini Howto http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/mini/Mail2News.html Regards, Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 19 02:11:37 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 19:11:37 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword CD References: <01011821522700.14014@joachim> Message-ID: <3A67A259.D10FF9FB@crosswire.org> Joachim, Your timing is PERFECT! I was just about to request everyone to update so that I might run a new batch. We're low on CDs over here again. THANK YOU SO MUCH! I'll keep ya posted when I get my stuff in and give ya a final date so that you'll have a chance to do anything else you want... -Troy. Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > Hi Troy! > > I updated the Sword CD a little bit (new KDE 2.01 sources in > GOODIES/misc.linux, removed old KDE-1.91 sources, uploaded current BibleTime > 0.25 and 0.31 binary and source packages, removed /sword-1.51/ and replaced > it by /sword-1.51a/), removed bibletime-0.31pre from the BETA directory). > > I tried to get gnomesword, but I can't find a program on the server to get > file using the http protocoll. Is there any? > > I hope it's okay for you that I made changes on the CD, that's why I'm > sending this eMail. > > -- Joachim > BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de > BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 21 22:27:44 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 15:27:44 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management References: <002401c08378$b9946c00$348a2d3f@family> Message-ID: <3A6B6260.F5B3DCDC@crosswire.org> Jonathan and others, Thanks again for your commitment and involvement with the project... > Hey, how are you doing? I hope everything is ok, I have not seen you > post things on the developers mailinglist in a long time, hope you are just > taking a well deserved vacation! :) Well, not exactly. I've been designing and leading the group developing the XML repository for GE and the first project to use the repository went online this week (3 months before our production deadline, which means we're feveroushly trying to optimize and debug code that we thought we'd have another few months to work on). My apologies for keeping up with sword. > I would like to ask you two things, about > organizing volunteers and the overall project management: > > 1. I am the kind of person that respects authority greatly and will not do > anything that undermines someone else's authority or areas under their > authority, so I would like to ask if it is ok with you that I do somethings > to organize volunteers and the overall project management, including > figuring out exactly what needs to be done, getting people to do some task > lists, documentation, and managing the volunteers and where they are > working, etc. This will all be of course with the advice and contribution of > the developers on the developers mailinglist, and you. But I see this needed > to sorely be done. I agree that we need some organization. Typically, though, there is someone who really has a desire to work on a particular area of the project (e.g. modules -Chris; KDE frontend -Joachim; Copyright stuff -you!; GNOME frontend- Terry; and so many others) and they lead their individual efforts. Maybe a bulletin board type of website for volunteers to go, where they might see who's doing what and who needs help... What do you think? I could help with a set of JSPs that write to our server's database where project leads could post project status and direction, or even actual tasks. > 2. Is it possible to setup a mailinglist to communicate and collaborate on > the new website design for Sword? I know you had concerns that you want the > website to be something that you are comfortable with the layout, design, > and the ability for someone to maintain it when the person doing it now has > to move on. I feel the best way to do this is setting up a mailinglist where > everyone can chat about it and start working out some of the details and > start coding the site all together as a community, including your input and > advice. This is apposed to people spending all the time to make an example > only for it to be rejected, or nothing done with it (as is what is happening > now), we need to develop it as a community. I have contacted the webmaster > of www.kde.org and asked him for some advice about redesigning an open > source projects website. I can share with you these ideas if you would like? What do you and everyone think about using our news server for this list? We had thought about moving the mailing list over to a news server sometime back, and had mixed sentiments. It would give us a great test to see how people like the news server paradigm. Thoughts? From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 21 23:42:35 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 16:42:35 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] CD image Message-ID: <3A6B73EB.4BF170B7@crosswire.org> New CD's are planning on being cut Tuesday. Please have all your updates in the ISO by Monday eve. Thanks! -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 00:05:29 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:05:29 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] sendmail troubles Message-ID: <3A6B7949.560289D0@crosswire.org> Having troubles with sendmail. Please excuse this test message to the list. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 17:01:38 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 18:01:38 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] New Sword CD Message-ID: <01012218013800.00713@joachim> Hi! Troy, I put some stuff of the alpha pages into BETA/win/ These are: vpl2mod.exe, mod2vpl.exe, sword-1.51a.exe, locales.zip and prn2sword.exe. I hope this is OK and the right directory, if you dislike it please remove them. I also updates some HOWTO/* files, some READMEs etc. I also updates the GnomeSword sources to the newest release. I think we should also update the binary in the root of the CD, but I don't have one. Could you do it, please? Thank you Troy! Joachim -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 23 03:13:28 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:13:28 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management References: <3A6C36A6.24690.19FA6910@localhost> Message-ID: <003501c084ea$7613d9c0$b20c8eac@family> Dear Everyone, I understand that there are people that head up each section, of the Sword project, like Joachim, Terry, etc. But I also see a need for someone that will push something's through that each subproject needs to be doing, this includes documentation, and volunteer coordinating. This way some of the daunting tasks of project management can be given to someone else and the leaders can focus on specifically developing and directing the volunteers under them. Does this make sense? I will put up at http://www.crosswire.org/sword/copyright/personal/swordprojectmanage.shtml some of my ideas for the hierarchy of project management, what documentation needs to be seen, and the areas I see the new redesigned Sword website needs to have. Please give me corrects, thoughts, etc. on this plan. I just want to see, one or more positions and people created to help all projects work together and someone to push for documentation and volunteer coordination, so we can get people in here, to work on things and get stuff done! Then maybe Joachim will not be the only one developing BibleTime, the Sword Project can have a new website, that can be updated easily, and will provide the users with more documentation on installation, and also documentation for developers on how to get started and creating modules (please this! then we will not have as many posts on the sword-support mailing list! :) ) Thanks for the time you will take to check everything out. I welcome all feedback!! In Christ, Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 23 10:34:44 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:34:44 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] autoconf support Message-ID: <3A6D5E44.31702.3BA1637@localhost> As promised, here is a patch that provides autoconf support for sword (as well as Debian package building support). It is for 1.5.1a http://homepage.ntlworld.com/danglassey/sword_1.5.1a-4.diff.gz I haven't tried applying it to CVS, but it ought to work without too many modifications. Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 23 10:48:44 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 03:48:44 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] New Sword CD References: <01012218013800.00713@joachim> Message-ID: <3A6D618C.C0A0C4CE@crosswire.org> I'm gonna give it a few more days as others have expressed interest in updating things. And this morning I got caught up again with CD orders. We're good thru December with the last of what I had. It worked out just right, so I think a few days won't hurt. -Troy. Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > Hi! > > Troy, I put some stuff of the alpha pages into BETA/win/ > > These are: > > vpl2mod.exe, mod2vpl.exe, sword-1.51a.exe, locales.zip and prn2sword.exe. > > I hope this is OK and the right directory, if you dislike it please remove > them. > > I also updates some HOWTO/* files, some READMEs etc. > I also updates the GnomeSword sources to the newest release. > > I think we should also update the binary in the root of the CD, but I don't > have one. Could you do it, please? > > Thank you Troy! > > Joachim > -- > Joachim Ansorg > BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de > BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 24 05:15:08 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:15:08 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] New Sword CD References: <01012218013800.00713@joachim> Message-ID: <3A6E64DC.D18517E6@crosswire.org> Joachim Ansorg wrote: > I also updates the GnomeSword sources to the newest release. > > I think we should also update the binary in the root of the CD, but I don't > have one. Could you do it, please? done. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 24 20:56:04 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:56:04 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] collaboration Message-ID: <3A6F4164.D8F45B99@crosswire.org> In an effort to better expand collaboration, I've started a #sword channel on irc.openprojects.net Chris, you still have any of those cool bots available? :) Please join if you would like to chat. -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 01:04:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 17:04:42 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] collaboration In-Reply-To: <3A6F4164.D8F45B99@crosswire.org> Message-ID: > In an effort to better expand collaboration, I've started a #sword > channel on irc.openprojects.net Good idea. :) > Chris, you still have any of those cool bots available? :) I do. Could I run it on crosswire? My ISP is pro-server but anti-IRC-bot. Since they're mostly concerned with porn/warez trading bots, I doubt they're really notice or mind, but I'm betting crosswire.org is a lot more stable than my box at home. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 01:55:48 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 18:55:48 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] collaboration References: Message-ID: <3A6F87A4.57B4B7D8@crosswire.org> Chris Little wrote: > I do. Could I run it on crosswire? My ISP is pro-server but anti-IRC-bot. > Since they're mostly concerned with porn/warez trading bots, I doubt they're > really notice or mind, but I'm betting crosswire.org is a lot more stable > than my box at home. Go for it. Let me know if you need any other rights. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 24 23:53:30 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:53:30 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] ISO updates Message-ID: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> Hello sword-devel, I have bibletime, gnomesword and sword1.5.1a compiled and in the packages directory on the cd for the new iso. Gnomesword and bibletime are the latest versions available. These were compiled fr Mandrake 7.2. Also Mandrake 7.2 does not require the extra helixcode packages for gnomesword to work. This time i put the srpm's in there to in case something happens to my hard drive. That's the only reason that I havn't updates the module rpm's yet because I lost all the spec files and srpms for them. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 22:22:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:22:46 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] ISO updates In-Reply-To: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> References: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> Message-ID: <01012523224603.04237@joachim> Hi Brook! > Hello sword-devel, > > I have bibletime, gnomesword and sword1.5.1a compiled and in the > packages directory on the cd for the new iso. Gnomesword and > bibletime are the latest versions available. These were compiled fr > Mandrake 7.2. I also put an RPM for Mandrake 7.2 there some days ago. I think we should ship both because yours is for i686, or am I wrong here? > Also Mandrake 7.2 does not require the extra helixcode packages for > gnomesword to work. This time i put the srpm's in there to in case > something happens to my hard drive. That's the only reason that I > havn't updates the module rpm's yet because I lost all the spec > files and srpms for them. -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 22:25:49 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:25:49 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword CD Message-ID: <01012523254904.04237@joachim> Hi Troy! Is it possible to wait until Sunday with the last date of ISO-updates? Matthias (my brother) is not at home at the moment (he's doing his military service), but until Sunday we can probably upload some updates to the MAK (maybe) and GerLut1545 modules. Is it ok? -- Joachim Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 22:46:25 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 14:46:25 -0800 Subject: Re[2]: [sword-devel] ISO updates In-Reply-To: <01012523224603.04237@joachim> References: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> <01012523224603.04237@joachim> Message-ID: <284661961.20010125144625@webmedic.net> Hello Joachim, No it is for i686 my box compiles that way by default and I fugured I would just leave it that way. Thursday, January 25, 2001, 2:22:46 PM, you wrote: Joachim Ansorg> Hi Brook! >> Hello sword-devel, >> >> I have bibletime, gnomesword and sword1.5.1a compiled and in the >> packages directory on the cd for the new iso. Gnomesword and >> bibletime are the latest versions available. These were compiled fr >> Mandrake 7.2. Joachim Ansorg> I also put an RPM for Mandrake 7.2 there some days ago. Joachim Ansorg> I think we should ship both because yours is for i686, or am I wrong here? >> Also Mandrake 7.2 does not require the extra helixcode packages for >> gnomesword to work. This time i put the srpm's in there to in case >> something happens to my hard drive. That's the only reason that I >> havn't updates the module rpm's yet because I lost all the spec >> files and srpms for them. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 22:45:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:45:46 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] ISO updates In-Reply-To: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> References: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> Message-ID: <01012523454600.18130@joachim> Hi Brook (again)! Do you have Caldera 2.4? Is is possible that you create an RPM for this distribution of BibleTime 0.25 ? Would be great! --Joachim > Hello sword-devel, > > I have bibletime, gnomesword and sword1.5.1a compiled and in the > packages directory on the cd for the new iso. Gnomesword and > bibletime are the latest versions available. These were compiled fr > Mandrake 7.2. > > Also Mandrake 7.2 does not require the extra helixcode packages for > gnomesword to work. This time i put the srpm's in there to in case > something happens to my hard drive. That's the only reason that I > havn't updates the module rpm's yet because I lost all the spec > files and srpms for them. -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 22:46:44 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:46:44 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Irenaeus Message-ID: <01012523464401.18130@joachim> Hi! Shouldn't Irenaeus put on the CD? I think we should. If Brook doesn't already have some RPMS of Irenaeus I'll try to create one. -- Joachim Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 23:02:10 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:02:10 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Iso updates Message-ID: <1835607226.20010125150210@webmedic.net> Hello Sword, Almost forgot I also downloaded the debs for sword, bibletime and gnomesword from the packagers website and put them in the cd forthe new iso. If I have time this after noon I'll try to compile the curses version of the front end for sword. If it turns out I'll put it either in the packages or the beta section on the cd. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 23:02:35 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:02:35 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Irenaeus In-Reply-To: <01012523464401.18130@joachim> References: <01012523464401.18130@joachim> Message-ID: <45632745.20010125150235@webmedic.net> Hello Joachim, I'll probably try to get on it this afternoon. Thursday, January 25, 2001, 2:46:44 PM, you wrote: Joachim Ansorg> Hi! Joachim Ansorg> Shouldn't Irenaeus put on the CD? Joachim Ansorg> I think we should. Joachim Ansorg> If Brook doesn't already have some RPMS of Irenaeus I'll try to create one. Joachim Ansorg> -- Joachim Joachim Ansorg> Joachim Ansorg Joachim Ansorg> BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de Joachim Ansorg> BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 23:04:21 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:04:21 -0800 Subject: Re[2]: [sword-devel] ISO updates In-Reply-To: <01012523454600.18130@joachim> References: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> <01012523454600.18130@joachim> Message-ID: <1365738406.20010125150421@webmedic.net> Hello Joachim, Yes I have caldera 2.4. It's not instaled right now but it would only take maybe an hour to install it and then i could compile some packages. Thursday, January 25, 2001, 2:45:46 PM, you wrote: Joachim Ansorg> Hi Brook (again)! Joachim Ansorg> Do you have Caldera 2.4? Joachim Ansorg> Is is possible that you create an RPM for this distribution of BibleTime 0.25 Joachim Ansorg> ? Joachim Ansorg> Would be great! Joachim Ansorg> --Joachim >> Hello sword-devel, >> >> I have bibletime, gnomesword and sword1.5.1a compiled and in the >> packages directory on the cd for the new iso. Gnomesword and >> bibletime are the latest versions available. These were compiled fr >> Mandrake 7.2. >> >> Also Mandrake 7.2 does not require the extra helixcode packages for >> gnomesword to work. This time i put the srpm's in there to in case >> something happens to my hard drive. That's the only reason that I >> havn't updates the module rpm's yet because I lost all the spec >> files and srpms for them. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 26 02:01:50 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:01:50 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyright website) References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> Message-ID: <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> [Sorry this is untimely, but i think it's an important issue.] BJW7TOAEM@aol.com wrote: > ... > I set up the web site so that we could start contacting copyright holders of > the modules for Sword that are locked, this way we could unlock them for all > of the public to use. > ... > Comments? Questions? Thanks for your time! Let me clarify this: are you wanting to get the modules released by the copyright holder for free, unencrypted distribution? I've been doing a lot of thinking about this issue, and you can criticise me for my lack of faith later, but (assuming i am understanding the idea rightly) i don't think this will happen. _Ever_. It would be great if it did, but i don't think it's going to. Now if my understanding above is not right, then what you are talking about is a way to issue unlock codes so that people can use the locked texts. Now before we can expect to get publishers to allow us to use their texts, we need to be able to provide them with assurances that their texts are protected using a well-proven mechanism. I started thinking about how we might achieve such a thing in the Sword project, and i knew that other people must have been thinking about these things, so i went looking at the Open eBook site , because i knew that would be a main hurdle that those guys would be interested in overcoming. This led me to a company called ContentGuard , and thence to the site for XrML, eXtensible Rights Markup Language, an XML specification for DRM (Digital Rights Management), which means describing and enforcing the rights of publishers, distributors, and consumers of digital content. Check it out at . On the XrML site, i came across what i consider a truly scary document: . This is an academic white paper written by a couple of guys (one of them a computer scientist, and the other a patent attorney specialising in intellectual property) in Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center back in 1997. In this article the authors represent publishing as a pendulum that can swing between the rights of publishers and the rights of consumers. Fundamentally, what they are saying is that back in the good old days of print media, there was a reasonable balance between the needs and rights of publishers and the needs and rights of consumers. Publishers had copyright to protect other people from ripping off their works for commercial gain, but consumers had a wide range of rights that fall under 'fair use', including copying portions of a work for personal or academic purposes, and access to technologies (e.g. photocopying) that allowed them to do this copying without overly concerning the publishers. They then contend that the digital revolution has swung the pendulum too far towards the rights of consumers, away from the publishers (due to the fact that perfect copies can be made of digital content), and that because of this, traditional publishers are reluctant to get into the digital publishing market. They claim what is needed is a standard for digital publishing that will enable publishers to enter the market with confidence that they are not going to be victimised by the consumer. The actual details of this digital standard are largely irrelevant, but in a nutshell, it involves creating 'trusted systems' - certified software that can be trusted to handle digital content in accordance with the rules given for its use by the publisher. What this boils down to in practical terms is that the software would be able to, for example, deny people the right to copy more than a certain number of pages or Kb of a work (without paying for a license), store and print it in a manner that makes it hard to copy in electronic and printed form (encrypted, with digital and printable watermarks), limit us to viewing the first chapter of a downloaded book until we've paid for more, etc. I believe this paper presents a view of digital publishing that, first, reflects the broad trends of the majority of commercial publishers (including those who publish Christian content), and second, cuts at the very core of what CrossWire is trying to do (which is make more content more available). (You can find more documents reflecting this viewpoint at .) Personally, i don't want to be part of a world where people are so close-fisted with their content that i have to pay them to even make a copy for reference purposes (like i might take a copy of a single page in a book and stick it in my filing cabinet), or have to rent a book that i want to read, and lose access to it when my "lease" runs out. To put this in (Windoze) Bible software terms, i think Online Bible has it right when it comes to content, not Logos. Online Bible are continually building their library of content that, admittedly, is unfamiliar to the commercial consumer (and probably inferior in some parts), but is not shackled by the license agreements of commercial publishing. I think this is something we need to constantly keep in mind. Chris Little wrote: > > > some of our leverage as being a free, non-commercial and OPEN SOURCE > > software package would be taken away. > > I don't think being Open Source is much of a selling point to publishers. Definitely not. Even if they understand it, they are not likely to want it. Neither would i if i was a commercial publisher. (See below for why.) > See Bob Pritchett from Logos' comments in the bible-linux egroups list on > the subject. Generally, they're afraid of someone cracking the software and > stealing their stuff. There's some logic to it, since someone with an > unlocked module could essentially do anything with that module, like print, > publish online, etc. Amusingly, I'd say we still have much stronger > protection than most closed-source, even commercial products. With SWORD, > you definitely have to have a decrypt key for every query. Logos, on the > other hand, just keeps track of which books you have unlocked and stores it > in a file. In other words, nothing is even encrypted, so you can pretty > easily share your unlock cache file or crack the program itself to ignore > the unlock checks. How are those problems not applicable to Sword? Think about this: where do you get the decrypt key that you need for every query? There are two obvious answers to this: store it in a file, or request it from an unlock server. (There are several other, less practical answers than these, like requiring the user to enter it manually each time, but let's ignore them for the time being.) Take the second case: downloading the key in real time from an unlock server. This immediately adds the requirement that the unlock server must be available at the time. That prevents us from being able to provide the ability on most PDAs, as well as being a pain for those people who do not have full-time 'Net access (which is most of the rest of the world, for those of you who have American-class bandwidth). Secondly, if the unlock server is to provide the client with a key, there must be an authentication mechanism for clients. This means that we would have to provide every client with an RSA key or equivalent that could be verified against a database on the unlock server. Now, since we are free software project, everyone can see the code to do this. What is to stop someone writing a program to do the handshake with the unlock server and then store the unlock key on their local computer? Then they can also write a program to decrypt the module locally without ever going to the unlock server. So this makes even the technique of using an unlock server equivalent to storing the keys in a local file. Now let's think about the local file storage issue. If we store the key unencrypted, anyone can write a program to open the module using it. If we decide to encrypt the module key, what do we use as the key for that? Where do we store that key? The whole problem starts again. All of this is rather moot at the moment, as software for unlocking, etc. doesn't even exist for Sword. Presently, anyone can go to the alpha test page, download the encryption keys, and write a program to dump out the raw text. That would be much easier than cracking Logos or sharing your Logos unlock files with your friends. (You have to restart the program each time you switch unlock files, and as far as i know, you can't combine them.) > I think most publishers can be categorized as > Pointy-Haired Bosses, though, so closed-source indicates greater security to > them, even in cases where it shouldn't. *sigh* Closed source _does_ give greater security to publishers. If all other things are equal (i.e. the type of technology, the method of distribution, etc.), closed source is more secure, because it is harder to reverse-engineer software than it is to forward-engineer (compile) it. It doesn't matter how many layers of abstraction you add in, with open source you can write a program that can retrieve the plain text of a module and do what you want with it. There are a few solutions to this: ignore the issue and assume that we will always have free texts and never need an unlocking mechanism (cf. Online Bible), convert Sword to LGPL or an equivalent and write closed software for the locked module management, or convince publishers that it is harder to write software than disassemble software. (There may be more answers.) I think the last of these is an exercise in futility, the first locks us out of the commercial text market for good, and the middle one is a little distasteful from the libertarian programmer point of view, but probably practical. Leon Brooks wrote: > > Chris Little wrote: > > >> some of our leverage as being a free, non-commercial and OPEN SOURCE > >> software package would be taken away. > > > I don't think being Open Source is much of a selling point to publishers. > > No, but it does illustrate that in principle we are not chest-hugging > greedy and paranoid about things. But in most cases, the people whose texts we want to use are. (Maybe that's a bit unfair of me, but not by much.) > ... > The advantage here is not ``open source'' but ``better methods,'' or (in > this case at least) better engineering. I think we're a long way from being able to assert that. It's not like the difference between NT and Linux just yet. Linux has better engineering because there are thousands of pairs of eyes looking at various parts of the OS. We've probably got 5 or 10 pairs. :-P > Really, any work done for Christ should be both free and open source > regardless, caveat that the workers concerned must find a way to sustain > themselves. Many ``Christian'' publishers are worrying too much about > staying in business and not enough about what their business really is. > While there is a definite duty of care involved, if God be for a > publisher, who can be against them? What if the publisher is not Christian? Zondervan is the overused example here - it is owned by Harper Collins, and they are just there to make money, not promote Christian living or values. It just so happens that Christian books (particularly of the conservative Evangelical persuasion) are a very profitable market. > Publishers should have the purity > and effectiveness of the works that they produce first in mind, the > dollars second (and the spread of the gospel zeroeth: it should not so > much be something to be borne in mind as a basic assumption, part of the > personality of the company). I think everyone here agrees with you. > > ... > One profitability method is to use electronic media as a leader back to > traditional media: ``if you like reading this text on line, have you > considered owning an attractively bound printed copy with that > traditional feel, clear print, lasting value and batteryless portable > operation?'' This, I believe, has a limited future. Have a read of the article i've linked above and see how it sits with you. > Either way, the purpose of Christian literature, espcially the Word of > God, should be primarily to get itself read and used. If we can find a > way to make this happen, hopefully commensurate with the profitability > of whatever the publishing companies become, I'm sure God will be > pleased. (-: > It seems to me that at present, there aren't too many viable alternatives to the 'If you like the electronic copy, you'll love the hard copy' marketing method. What "ways to make this happen" are you thinking of? Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear P.S. Quick gripe: Jonathan, Can you turn of HTML on your email messages? It makes them very hard to read. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 26 03:36:32 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 19:36:32 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Iso Update Message-ID: <1667304902.20010125193632@webmedic.net> Hello Sword, I tracked down the Irenaeus rpm's and put them in the beta directory for the cd. I didn't make these rpm's they were made by the author. I don't really like the rpm itself it needs some work but everytime I try to compile it on my system it tells me that I don't have a working compiler. Which is imposible because I just used the compiler to compile bibletime, sword, gnomesword and others. Anyway I included the authors original rpm it runs on my mandrake system but there are some screen refresh problems wich the author is already aware of. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 26 04:45:20 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (sword-devel@crosswire.org) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:45:20 EST Subject: Re[2]: [sword-devel] ISO updates Message-ID: <7a.fae9aa7.27a25ae0@aol.com> --part1_7a.fae9aa7.27a25ae0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Everyone, I am not sure if it would help any, but doesn't sourceforge.net offer compiling farms for all the latest Linux distributions, would it be possible to compile on those for making rpm's and such for distribution? -Jonathan BJW7TOAEM@aol.com --part1_7a.fae9aa7.27a25ae0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Everyone,

      I am not sure if it would help any, but doesn't sourceforge.net offer
compiling farms for all the latest Linux distributions, would it be possible
to compile on those for making rpm's and such for distribution?

-Jonathan
BJW7TOAEM@aol.com --part1_7a.fae9aa7.27a25ae0_boundary-- From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 26 10:13:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:13:42 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Iso updates In-Reply-To: <1835607226.20010125150210@webmedic.net> Message-ID: <3A714DD6.18291.9DF1682@localhost> just one thing I forgot to point out on the site. The debs are for unstable debian _not_ potato (neither kde nor the bits of gnome that gnomesword currently needs are in potato, the current stable release). Daniel On 25 Jan 2001, at 15:02, Brook Humphrey sent forth the message: > Hello Sword, > > Almost forgot I also downloaded the debs for sword, bibletime and > gnomesword from the packagers website and put them in the cd forthe > new iso. > > If I have time this after noon I'll try to compile the > curses version of the front end for sword. If it turns out I'll put > it either in the packages or the beta section on the cd. > > -- > Best regards, > Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net > > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 26 11:21:19 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:21:19 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Iso Update In-Reply-To: <1667304902.20010125193632@webmedic.net> References: <1667304902.20010125193632@webmedic.net> Message-ID: <01012612124200.04606@joachim> Hi! I had the same problems with configure. I compiled with "LDFLAGS="-lz -lstdc++ CPPFLAGS=/path/to/swordir/include/ ./configure" To compile with Sword 1.51a you have to replace in line "Delete()" with "deleteEntry()". Maybe you have to edit configure.in to change the -lcurses part to -lncurses. I hope this helps you! I'm so glad that you have so much experience with RPMS. Without you we would have much more work! Thank you Brook! Joachim > Hello Sword, > > I tracked down the Irenaeus rpm's and put them in the beta directory > for the cd. I didn't make these rpm's they were made by the author. > I don't really like the rpm itself it needs some work but everytime > I try to compile it on my system it tells me that I don't have a > working compiler. Which is imposible because I just used the > compiler to compile bibletime, sword, gnomesword and others. Anyway > I included the authors original rpm it runs on my mandrake system > but there are some screen refresh problems wich the author is > already aware of. -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 27 05:10:15 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 21:10:15 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyright website) References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> Message-ID: <002501c0881f$72ea5f20$6a8a2d3f@family> Paul, I would like to first of all thank you for taking the time, to respond, and in such depth. That really means a lot to me because that is how I will see and understand flaws in my plans and strategy! > BJW7TOAEM@aol.com wrote: > > ... > > I set up the web site so that we could start contacting copyright holders of > > the modules for Sword that are locked, this way we could unlock them for all > > of the public to use. > > ... > > Comments? Questions? Thanks for your time! > > Let me clarify this: are you wanting to get the modules released by the > copyright holder for free, unencrypted distribution? You are exactly correct! I am not sure about the technological side of the modules, but yes my strategy is to have the copyright holders release the moducles for free. Now I am not nieve or stupid and I hope that those will never be ascribed to me (I know you didn't say either!), I understand how the world works and how business works, but I also know how God works, and so that is why I have this as my goal. If we meet with opposition from the publishers, then maybe we will need to modify the strategy to see if we can liscense the modules to be distrupted for a small fee, but I will never give up on trying to get all texts to be distrupted for free. > I've been doing a lot of thinking about this issue, and you can > criticise me for my lack of faith later, but (assuming i am > understanding the idea rightly) i don't think this will happen. > _Ever_. It would be great if it did, but i don't think it's going to. I think it will happen. :) > Now if my understanding above is not right, then what you are talking > about is a way to issue unlock codes so that people can use the locked > texts. Now before we can expect to get publishers to allow us to use > their texts, we need to be able to provide them with assurances that > their texts are protected using a well-proven mechanism. > > I started thinking about how we might achieve such a thing in the Sword > project, and i knew that other people must have been thinking about > these things, so i went looking at the Open eBook site > , because i knew that would be a main hurdle > that those guys would be interested in overcoming. > > This led me to a company called ContentGuard > , and thence to the site for XrML, > eXtensible Rights Markup Language, an XML specification for DRM (Digital > Rights Management), which means describing and enforcing the rights of > publishers, distributors, and consumers of digital content. Check it > out at . > > On the XrML site, i came across what i consider a truly scary document: > . This is an academic > white paper written by a couple of guys (one of them a computer > scientist, and the other a patent attorney specialising in intellectual > property) in Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center back in 1997. In this > article the authors represent publishing as a pendulum that can swing > between the rights of publishers and the rights of consumers. I will check out the links, but like I said before I don't really want to be involved in the technical side of how the modules will be distrupted, I think it would sufice how we do it now with unlock keys, you are right people can just decrypt the modules and spread the text around, but they can do that with Online Bible, and pretty much any other Bible packages, so this should not stop us. But it should be considered. > Fundamentally, what they are saying is that back in the good old days of > print media, there was a reasonable balance between the needs and rights > of publishers and the needs and rights of consumers. Publishers had > copyright to protect other people from ripping off their works for > commercial gain, but consumers had a wide range of rights that fall > under 'fair use', including copying portions of a work for personal or > academic purposes, and access to technologies (e.g. photocopying) that > allowed them to do this copying without overly concerning the > publishers. > > They then contend that the digital revolution has swung the pendulum too > far towards the rights of consumers, away from the publishers (due to > the fact that perfect copies can be made of digital content), and that > because of this, traditional publishers are reluctant to get into the > digital publishing market. They claim what is needed is a standard for > digital publishing that will enable publishers to enter the market with > confidence that they are not going to be victimised by the consumer. > > The actual details of this digital standard are largely irrelevant, but > in a nutshell, it involves creating 'trusted systems' - certified > software that can be trusted to handle digital content in accordance > with the rules given for its use by the publisher. > > What this boils down to in practical terms is that the software would be > able to, for example, deny people the right to copy more than a certain > number of pages or Kb of a work (without paying for a license), store > and print it in a manner that makes it hard to copy in electronic and > printed form (encrypted, with digital and printable watermarks), limit > us to viewing the first chapter of a downloaded book until we've paid > for more, etc. > > I believe this paper presents a view of digital publishing that, first, > reflects the broad trends of the majority of commercial publishers > (including those who publish Christian content), and second, cuts at the > very core of what CrossWire is trying to do (which is make more content > more available). (You can find more documents reflecting this viewpoint > at .) This is very disturbing! I have never liked the idea of Christian publishers, authors, etc, keeping their works just for themselves, there are so many different works that would help Christians, and I wish people could get to them, but all of this politics just doesn't sit well with me. > Personally, i don't want to be part of a world where people are so > close-fisted with their content that i have to pay them to even make a > copy for reference purposes (like i might take a copy of a single page > in a book and stick it in my filing cabinet), or have to rent a book > that i want to read, and lose access to it when my "lease" runs out. > > To put this in (Windoze) Bible software terms, i think Online Bible has > it right when it comes to content, not Logos. Online Bible are > continually building their library of content that, admittedly, is > unfamiliar to the commercial consumer (and probably inferior in some > parts), but is not shackled by the license agreements of commercial > publishing. I think this is something we need to constantly keep in > mind. > > Chris Little wrote: > > > > > some of our leverage as being a free, non-commercial and OPEN SOURCE > > > software package would be taken away. > > > > I don't think being Open Source is much of a selling point to publishers. > > Definitely not. Even if they understand it, they are not likely to want > it. Neither would i if i was a commercial publisher. (See below for > why.) Yea, maybe not the close minded publishers, but some of our texts are from individual people, and it maybe something we can show to them to let them know that we as a political philosophy are commited to a product that will help people, without the barier of fianances, etc. > > See Bob Pritchett from Logos' comments in the bible-linux egroups list on > > the subject. Generally, they're afraid of someone cracking the software and > > stealing their stuff. There's some logic to it, since someone with an > > unlocked module could essentially do anything with that module, like print, > > publish online, etc. Amusingly, I'd say we still have much stronger > > protection than most closed-source, even commercial products. With SWORD, > > you definitely have to have a decrypt key for every query. Logos, on the > > other hand, just keeps track of which books you have unlocked and stores it > > in a file. In other words, nothing is even encrypted, so you can pretty > > easily share your unlock cache file or crack the program itself to ignore > > the unlock checks. > > How are those problems not applicable to Sword? Think about this: where > do you get the decrypt key that you need for every query? There are two > obvious answers to this: store it in a file, or request it from an > unlock server. (There are several other, less practical answers than > these, like requiring the user to enter it manually each time, but let's > ignore them for the time being.) > > Take the second case: downloading the key in real time from an unlock > server. This immediately adds the requirement that the unlock server > must be available at the time. That prevents us from being able to > provide the ability on most PDAs, as well as being a pain for those > people who do not have full-time 'Net access (which is most of the rest > of the world, for those of you who have American-class bandwidth). > > Secondly, if the unlock server is to provide the client with a key, > there must be an authentication mechanism for clients. This means that > we would have to provide every client with an RSA key or equivalent that > could be verified against a database on the unlock server. > > Now, since we are free software project, everyone can see the code to do > this. What is to stop someone writing a program to do the handshake > with the unlock server and then store the unlock key on their local > computer? Then they can also write a program to decrypt the module > locally without ever going to the unlock server. So this makes even the > technique of using an unlock server equivalent to storing the keys in a > local file. > > Now let's think about the local file storage issue. If we store the key > unencrypted, anyone can write a program to open the module using it. If > we decide to encrypt the module key, what do we use as the key for > that? Where do we store that key? The whole problem starts again. > > All of this is rather moot at the moment, as software for unlocking, > etc. doesn't even exist for Sword. Presently, anyone can go to the > alpha test page, download the encryption keys, and write a program to > dump out the raw text. That would be much easier than cracking Logos or > sharing your Logos unlock files with your friends. (You have to restart > the program each time you switch unlock files, and as far as i know, you > can't combine them.) Like I said before I think that the mechanism that is now set up is just fine, but of course other may have other opinions. > Paul > --------- > "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 > http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear > > P.S. Quick gripe: Jonathan, Can you turn of HTML on your email > messages? It makes them very hard to read. Sorry about the HTML on in my email it is AOL, so I will have to find out how to turn that off. Thanks again Paul for your comments, I will be contemplating them for a while! I am sure this issue with come up again. Hey, I would love to here what you think of the official letter I plan on sending to publishers, you can find it on the Copyright Website: http://www.crosswire.org/sword/copyright/ -Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 27 10:27:18 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 20:27:18 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyright website) References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> <002501c0881f$72ea5f20$6a8a2d3f@family> Message-ID: <3A72A286.DBC072E@bigfoot.com> Jonathan Hughes wrote: > > Paul, > > I would like to first of all thank you for taking the time, to respond, > and in such depth. That really means a lot to me because that is how I will > see and understand flaws in my plans and strategy! I don't really think it's so much a flaw in your plans as simply an unrealistic dream. I think efforts need to be concentrated on developing and publishing unencumbered content rather than trying to unencumber existing content that is out there. I'm still tossing up in my own mind which option is best for unencumbered texts: to have the software copyrighted, but protected by a free software-like license (e.g. the OPL ) or to simply have the text in the public domain. The latter strategy has been taken with the WEB, and the former by GLW (both on MPJ's site ). Jerry, are you out there? I'd be interested in your thoughts on the copyright + open license vs. public domain issue. My current thoughts are that public domain would be more desirable in terms of open philosophy, but that it would leave the texts open to becoming copyrighted again through people doing work on the texts and slapping their own copyright on them. That is something i definitely want to avoid, so at the moment, i lean more towards copyrighting and using the OPL or a similar license. > ... > I understand > how the world works and how business works, but I also know how God works, > and so that is why I have this as my goal. If God was number one for all of the publishers you are approaching, there would be no problem. However, he is the last thing on the mind of some of them (good luck with Zondervan!). > If we meet with opposition from > the publishers, then maybe we will need to modify the strategy to see if we > can liscense the modules to be distrupted for a small fee, but I will never > give up on trying to get all texts to be distrupted for free. This is where my technical comments come in. How do you distribute for a fee, when anyone can take one of those texts and copy it for all their friends? Has anyone (this means you, Troy and Chris :-) got any comments on my previous analysis of the unlock situation? > ... > I will check out the links, but like I said before I don't really want > to be involved in the technical side of how the modules will be distrupted, > I think it would sufice how we do it now with unlock keys, you are right > people can just decrypt the modules and spread the text around, but they can > do that with Online Bible, and pretty much any other Bible packages, so this > should not stop us. But it should be considered. The difference between us and nearly all the others is that Sword is free software. That puts us on the back foot right from the start. > ... > Yea, maybe not the close minded publishers, but some of our texts are > from individual people, and it maybe something we can show to them to let > them know that we as a political philosophy are commited to a product that > will help people, without the barier of fianances, etc. That is something that i think is worth checking out with those individuals. > ... > > P.S. Quick gripe: Jonathan, Can you turn of HTML on your email > > messages? It makes them very hard to read. > > Sorry about the HTML on in my email it is AOL, so I will have to find > out how to turn that off. Thanks. ;-) > Thanks again Paul for your comments, I will be > contemplating them for a while! I am sure this issue with come up again. > Hey, I would love to here what you think of the official letter I plan on > sending to publishers, you can find it on the Copyright Website: > http://www.crosswire.org/sword/copyright/ One thing i would suggest is of utmost importance is trying to get copyright release for forthcoming Bible versions. I know of two that are worth mention: the HCSB (Holman Christian Standard Bible) from LifeWay Christian Resources, and the ESV (English Standard Version) from Crossway Books. (I don't have any contact details for either of those.) These sound like they are going to be fairly significant translations (esp. the ESV - see below for some links), and if we can get the publishers to agree to free distribution early in the piece (pointing them to the precedent of Davidsons Press and the ISV), we would be in a good position. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear Links to articles about new Bible translations: (under the heading 'Manna, Mannah or Mana?') From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 27 20:37:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 12:37:01 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword for CE problems Message-ID: I've got Sword almost building in eVC++. The compile works fine, but I'm still getting linker errors. I've cleared up most of them, but am still getting the following list of errors. Some of the later ones I can deal with. For example, I'm not yet including zlib stuff, so (un)compress isn't yet resolving. The ones I'm completely clueless about are "const type_info::`vftable'", "__RTDynamicCast", "__CxxFrameHandler", and "__CxxCatchReturn". Does anyone know what these are or have any ideas how to fix these last errors? I'm only 42 linker errors away from success. yay! :) --Chris Little sxl.lib(fclose.obj) : error LNK2005: fclose already defined in coredll.lib(COREDLL.dll) ztext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) rawtext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) swmodule.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) versekey.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) referenced in function "private: void __cdecl VerseKey::initstatics(void)" (?initstatics@VerseKey@@AAAXXZ) zcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl zCom::~zCom(void)" (??1zCom@@UAA@XZ) hrefcom.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) rawcom.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) rawfiles.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) rawgbf.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl RawGBF::operator char *(void)" (??BRawGBF@@UAAPADXZ) ztext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast rawtext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast swmodule.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast versekey.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast zcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl zCom::operator char *(void)" (??BzCom@@UAAPADXZ) hrefcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast referenced in function "public: virtual char * __cdecl HREFCom::getRawEntry(void)" (?getRawEntry@HREFCom@@UAAPADXZ) rawcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast referenced in function "public: virtual char * __cdecl RawCom::getRawEntry(void)" (?getRawEntry@RawCom@@UAAPADXZ) rawfiles.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast rawgbf.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl RawGBF::~RawGBF(void)" (??1RawGBF@@UAA@XZ) rawtext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler swmodule.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler zcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl zCom::operator char *(void)" (??BzCom@@UAAPADXZ) ztext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler hrefcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl HREFCom::~HREFCom(void)" (??1HREFCom@@UAA@XZ) rawcom.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler rawfiles.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler rawgbf.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler rawtext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn swmodule.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn zcom.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn ztext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn hrefcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn referenced in function "public: virtual char * __cdecl HREFCom::getRawEntry(void)" (?getRawEntry@HREFCom@@UAAPADXZ) rawcom.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn rawfiles.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn rawgbf.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn sapphire.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "void * __cdecl memset(void *,int,unsigned int)" (?memset@@YAPAXPAXHI@Z) referenced in function "public: void __cdecl sapphire::burn(void)" (?burn@sapphire@@QAAXXZ) swmodule.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol regfree referenced in function "public: virtual class ListKey & __cdecl SWModule::Search(char const *,int,int,class SWKey *,bool *,void (__cdecl*)(char,void *),void *)" (?Search@SWModule@@UAAA AVListKey@@PBDHHPAVSWKey@@PA_NP6AXDPAX@Z3@Z) swmodule.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol regexec referenced in function "public: virtual class ListKey & __cdecl SWModule::Search(char const *,int,int,class SWKey *,bool *,void (__cdecl*)(char,void *),void *)" (?Search@SWModule@@UAAA AVListKey@@PBDHHPAVSWKey@@PA_NP6AXDPAX@Z3@Z) swmodule.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol regcomp referenced in function "public: virtual class ListKey & __cdecl SWModule::Search(char const *,int,int,class SWKey *,bool *,void (__cdecl*)(char,void *),void *)" (?Search@SWModule@@UAAA AVListKey@@PBDHHPAVSWKey@@PA_NP6AXDPAX@Z3@Z) zipcomprs.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol compress referenced in function "public: virtual void __cdecl ZipCompress::Encode(void)" (?Encode@ZipCompress@@UAAXXZ) zipcomprs.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol uncompress referenced in function "public: virtual void __cdecl ZipCompress::Decode(void)" (?Decode@ZipCompress@@UAAXXZ) ARMRel/RapierBible.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 10 unresolved externals Error executing link.exe. Creating browse info file... RapierBible.exe - 42 error(s), 0 warning(s) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 28 17:50:41 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 18:50:41 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Available books of a module Message-ID: <01012818504100.02142@joachim> Hi! Is there a way to check which books exist in a module? I'd be glad for help! -- Joachim Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 28 20:21:26 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 13:21:26 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyright website) In-Reply-To: <3A72A286.DBC072E@bigfoot.com> References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> <002501c0881f$72ea5f20$6a8a2d3f@family> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010128110858.009fba20@mail.dancris.com> I think there is room for both releasing as PD and licensing in some "open" way. I wish more Bible versions were being released as PD. But, I see reasons why even a Bible version could benefit from licensing. If you produce something like your own commentary, and don't want others editing your expressions and releasing the edited version without changes, a license can help you prevent others from putting words in your mouth. A lot depends on what is the purpose of releasing a work and what you want to protect it from. One of the key things I would require in a license, if I used one, would be a requirement that all changes be documented, and if possible, at least a footnote in any text at the point where it is changed. There are deeper issues. Personally, I don't like to have rules that men of good conscience will violate. If you copyright a Bible version, people that know what that means and what the law is will still violate the copyright believing they are honoring God. In any case, what will you do when people violate your copyright or license? Will you sue them in a court of law? Or just contact them and let them know that they are being bad? I have been busy this last week in a private email exchange between a person that publishes a commercial Bible CD, that claims his "copyright" on a public domain work has been infringed, and two programmers of free software, and another person that produced the original PD files that the two programmers are using. This incident will probably end with both sides thinking the other is wrong, but no one being sued. However, often after this kind of thing, there will be finger pointing and parties on both sides will use those on the other side as object lessons in future communications. This is bad for the Church. If a person has the Holy Spirit let him do what he is lead to do, in spite of what I think he should. If a person does not have the Holy Spirit, why should I waste my time treating the symptoms of his darkness, instead of using that time to help those seeking light? As you know, there is nothing magical about licenses such as GPL or OpenContent. Every work we put out could have a unique license. What GPL or OpenContent provide is a standard, and, hopefully, something that is well written and designed. But, CrossWire or another in this line of work, could produce another standard or standards, that would better fit the needs of this work. Therefor: with all that said, if I could have it my way, this is what I would do (mileage may vary depending on your own opinions). I would produce a statement that would indicate my hopes for how a work would be treated and used. Take all the things you would put in a license and write them as statements of desire. Instead of "you must" put "we hope you will." Instead of "you must not" put "we hope you won't." Then I would include in the statement a release to public domain. There could be a standard version of this statement. Perhaps a CrossWire Release to Public Domain Statement (CRPLS). Of course, people can just delete the statement and do whatever they want with the work, but they can answer to God and I won't feel a need to spend time fighting for the "rights." Jerry Hastings hastings@bf.org At 08:27 PM 1/27/2001 +1000, Paul Gear wrote: >Jerry, are you out there? I'd be interested in your thoughts on the >copyright + open license vs. public domain issue. My current thoughts >are that public domain would be more desirable in terms of open >philosophy, but that it would leave the texts open to becoming >copyrighted again through people doing work on the texts and slapping >their own copyright on them. That is something i definitely want to >avoid, so at the moment, i lean more towards copyrighting and using the >OPL or a similar license. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 10:27:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:27:46 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyrightmatters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyrightwebsite) References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> <002501c0881f$72ea5f20$6a8a2d3f@family> <4.2.0.58.20010128110858.009fba20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <3A7545A2.8BD666FB@bigfoot.com> Jerry Hastings wrote: > ... > I think there is room for both releasing as PD and licensing in some "open" > way. I wish more Bible versions were being released as PD. But, I see > reasons why even a Bible version could benefit from licensing. If you > produce something like your own commentary, and don't want others editing > your expressions and releasing the edited version without changes, a > license can help you prevent others from putting words in your mouth. A lot > depends on what is the purpose of releasing a work and what you want to > protect it from. One of the key things I would require in a license, if I > used one, would be a requirement that all changes be documented, and if > possible, at least a footnote in any text at the point where it is changed. That's a good point: what are the requirements of a content license? The main issues from my perspective are: - that anyone should be able to use, copy, redistribute, and modify the work in any form without the requirement for specific permission from the author or payment of any licensing fee - that the portions of the work attributable to each contributor be clearly identifiable - that all derivative works be protected under the same conditions as the original work > There are deeper issues. Personally, I don't like to have rules that men of > good conscience will violate. If you copyright a Bible version, people that > know what that means and what the law is will still violate the copyright > believing they are honoring God. In any case, what will you do when people > violate your copyright or license? Will you sue them in a court of law? Or > just contact them and let them know that they are being bad? That depends. If i think the institution involved is not Christian and their offence was serious enough, i would certainly consider asking my legal counsel to write them a letter. It would not likely go as far as court, simply because i would not likely feel it would be worth it, but yes, i would contact them and tell them they are being bad. > ... > If a person has the Holy Spirit let him do what he is lead to do, in spite > of what I think he should. If a person does not have the Holy Spirit, why > should I waste my time treating the symptoms of his darkness, instead of > using that time to help those seeking light? Because licenses are a concise way of stating the conditions under which an author desires his or her work to be used, and because there are several good ones available already, it is little effort to apply them to new works. > ... > Therefor: with all that said, if I could have it my way, this is what I > would do (mileage may vary depending on your own opinions). I would produce > a statement that would indicate my hopes for how a work would be treated > and used. Take all the things you would put in a license and write them as > statements of desire. Instead of "you must" put "we hope you will." Instead > of "you must not" put "we hope you won't." That's a good point. Do you think that using that sort of approach means that the 'license' is more likely to be honoured? I personally do not - i think people are less likely to violate a license than a 'statement of intent', simply because the modern Western world understands the importance of legal terminology and for the most part is rather litigation-averse. ;-) Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 15:29:00 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:29:00 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian Message-ID: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which ones. These are my thoughts: Personal commentary - so you can write notes (~40k) 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) KJV - it's standard (~2.2MB, less without Strongs ref.) 1 more modern translation - WEB (~1.4MB) Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references (~800k) Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) There's also a copyright issue. I assume the KJV with Strongs can't be included because the Strongs formatting is copyrighted by Larry Pierce. Is there an alternative version? Because there's already a couple of other programs that have the KJV it might not be allowed in anyway though. Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 15:52:16 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ivan E. Moore II) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 08:52:16 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost>; from danglassey@yahoo.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:29:00PM -0000 References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <20010129085216.A1628@tdyc.com> > I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as > core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every > module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which > ones. > > These are my thoughts: Personally I think this is the *only* one that should go in. It gives functionality without being tied to a specific religion. And it's small! For a distribution that's good. :) > Personal commentary - so you can write notes (~40k) While definatly good choices I truely think these would be better served sitting in the master repository. Maybe with a installer or proper docs pointing users here. > 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) > KJV - it's standard (~2.2MB, less without Strongs ref.) > 1 more modern translation - WEB (~1.4MB) > Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references > (~800k) > Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) > > There's also a copyright issue. I assume the KJV with Strongs can't > be included because the Strongs formatting is copyrighted by Larry > Pierce. Is there an alternative version? > > Because there's already a couple of other programs that have the > KJV it might not be allowed in anyway though. and also keeps the legal issues out of the distribution. :) just my 2cents Ivan -- ---------------- Ivan E. Moore II rkrusty@tdyc.com http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 16:18:28 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:18:28 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Daniel Glassey wrote: > I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as > core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every > module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which > ones. I don't understand the reason for the Debian restriction. Some general licencing with the modules' material or a Debianism? What about other Linux distributions, e.g. RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE; subject to the same restrictions? > These are my thoughts: I have radically different thoughts > KJV - it's standard (~2.2MB, less without Strongs ref.) > 1 more modern translation - WEB (~1.4MB) The AV I can livest without thank thee muchly. Certainly a readable modern translation should be core. Personally I'd like the CEV failing that the NLT or the NET(*). Maybe the ISV or GW. That is a translation is mandatory but nothing else. I don't think one should specify which translation is core. Just that at least one must be present for correct insttallation and operation. I might, for example, only want a Swedish translation without any English text at all. Though > Personal commentary - so you can write notes (~40k) is highly desirable. And might necessarily be considered core. The following are essential "nice to haves" but certainly shouldn't be considered "core" modules. > 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) > Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references (~800k) > Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) Perhaps a reading scheme might be included with these essentials. The Navigators publish on (as a PDF file, a Word document, and, if I recall correctly, as Palm and Outlook calendar updates). My preference is for "Through the Bible Every Day in One year" but unless it has recently appeared in on-line format there's only printed versions available. (A check of http://cover2cover.org/ later will tell me one way or the other.) Or lectionary. The new Church of England Lectionary for "Common Worship" isn't yet available on-line. > There's also a copyright issue. I'm not going to comment upon the copyright issue. I'm not a copyright lawyer; I'm not a lawyer at all. (*) Is any working on a NET module? I really like this translation and have the HTML version on my workstation. The footnoting is prolific, with every translational choice justified and corroborated. Wish that every translation committee were that thorough. They advertise Palm and Logos formats on their web site. I've got contacts with the NET team so if anyone's interested and no one's already done so I'll approach them about producing a sword module. I'd also be intersted in an ISV version but I only have the RTF file generated from Microsoft Word. And then only the New Testament; last time I looked the Old Testament hadn't been completed. The other modern translation I'd like to see is GW (God's Word). This too is available in electronic format but sadly only as PDF files. :-( Strcitly only for sampling purposes. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 16:20:16 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 08:20:16 -0800 Subject: Re[2]: [sword-devel] Iso Update In-Reply-To: <01012612124200.04606@joachim> References: <1667304902.20010125193632@webmedic.net> <01012612124200.04606@joachim> Message-ID: <16147775873.20010129082016@webmedic.net> Hello Joachim, Friday, January 26, 2001, 3:21:19 AM, you wrote: Joachim Ansorg> Hi! Joachim Ansorg> I had the same problems with configure. I compiled with "LDFLAGS="-lz Joachim Ansorg> -lstdc++ CPPFLAGS=/path/to/swordir/include/ ./configure" this part is easy for me to understand. I just put this in place of the regular configure line. Joachim Ansorg> To compile with Sword 1.51a you have to replace in line "Delete()" with Joachim Ansorg> "deleteEntry()". In what file do I look for this? I don't mind looking but I jave been unable to find it. Or am I missing omething obvious? Joachim Ansorg> Maybe you have to edit configure.in to change the -lcurses part to -lncurses. This I found and changed. Joachim Ansorg> I hope this helps you! Joachim Ansorg> I'm so glad that you have so much experience with RPMS. Joachim Ansorg> Without you we would have much more work! Joachim Ansorg> Thank you Brook! Joachim Ansorg> Joachim >> Hello Sword, >> >> I tracked down the Irenaeus rpm's and put them in the beta directory >> for the cd. I didn't make these rpm's they were made by the author. >> I don't really like the rpm itself it needs some work but everytime >> I try to compile it on my system it tells me that I don't have a >> working compiler. Which is imposible because I just used the >> compiler to compile bibletime, sword, gnomesword and others. Anyway >> I included the authors original rpm it runs on my mandrake system >> but there are some screen refresh problems wich the author is >> already aware of. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 16:44:54 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ivan E. Moore II) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:44:54 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: ; from trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:18:28PM +0000 References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <20010129094454.A15255@tdyc.com> > > I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as > > core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every > > module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which > > ones. > > I don't understand the reason for the Debian restriction. Some general > licencing with the modules' material or a Debianism? What about other > Linux distributions, e.g. RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE; subject to the same > restrictions? There are no restrictions. It's preference. There are several hundred megs worth of modules for sword. They could potentially take up their own CD. Debian developers (not sure about other distros) are not going to be too happy (nor will the mirrors) about increasing the size of the distribution by a 1/3 with non-technical packages that are specific to sword. Ivan -- ---------------- Ivan E. Moore II rkrusty@tdyc.com http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 17:00:10 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:00:10 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > (*) Is any working on a NET module? Because of their licensing restrictions, we would be unable to distribute the NET, so I haven't bothered creating a module. It's on my todo list, but comes after every other possible use of my time. > I'd also be intersted in an ISV version but I only have the RTF file > generated from Microsoft Word. And then only the New Testament; last time > I looked the Old Testament hadn't been completed. We have the ISV in SWORD format. It's not a very good edition, lacking the notes entirely. I'm working on a new edition, with notes, but it will take me some time to complete yet. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 17:05:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:05:34 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <3A75A2DE.2291.1A48D02@localhost> On 29 Jan 2001, at 15:29, Daniel Glassey sent forth the message: > There's also a copyright issue. I assume the KJV with Strongs can't > be included because the Strongs formatting is copyrighted by Larry > Pierce. Is there an alternative version? Actually, this makes me think of an idea for another project. It's a _lot_ of work probably, but Strongs numbers could be added to WEB or another version. Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 17:05:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:05:34 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <3A75A2DE.27928.1A48CC4@localhost> On 29 Jan 2001, at 16:18, Trevor Jenkins sent forth the message: > On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Daniel Glassey wrote: > > > I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as > > core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every > > module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which > > ones. > > I don't understand the reason for the Debian restriction. Some general > licencing with the modules' material or a Debianism? Resources. The Debian archive is mirrored all over the place and it is unreasonable take up a large portion of the distribution with just our data. This is to actually get it to be part of the distribution not just to make packages. > What about other > Linux distributions, e.g. RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE; subject to the same > restrictions? I'd assume so though I don't know if anyone has tried to get them in. > > These are my thoughts: > > I have radically different thoughts fair enough :) > > KJV - it's standard (~2.2MB, less without Strongs ref.) > > 1 more modern translation - WEB (~1.4MB) > > The AV I can livest without thank thee muchly. whatever. > Certainly a readable modern translation should be core. I'd agree, they are just hard to get hold of in a freely distributable manner :( > Personally I'd like the CEV failing that the > NLT or the NET(*). Maybe the ISV or GW. Well, they would need to be made into sword modules first! > That is a translation is mandatory but nothing else. I don't think one > should specify which translation is core. Just that at least one must be > present for correct insttallation and operation. I might, for example, > only want a Swedish translation without any English text at all. Yep, that's a problem, but I doubt more than 1 will get in. All others will be at crosswire (theres currently a conversion of all the rpms on the crosswire site at ftp://kde.tdyc.com/pub/kde/debian/dists/potato/sword/binary-all/ ) and people can be directed to them. > Though > > > Personal commentary - so you can write notes (~40k) > > is highly desirable. And might necessarily be considered core. yep. > The following are essential "nice to haves" but certainly shouldn't be > considered "core" modules. > > > 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) > > Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references (~800k) > > Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) I was thinking that it would be good to have 1 of every type of module just to show what it does. I guess though that personal commentary may be enough, and Strongs is a bit irrelevant without a marked text. > Perhaps a reading scheme might be included with these essentials. The > Navigators publish on (as a PDF file, a Word document, and, if I recall > correctly, as Palm and Outlook calendar updates). My preference is for > "Through the Bible Every Day in One year" but unless it has recently > appeared in on-line format there's only printed versions available. (A > check of http://cover2cover.org/ later will tell me one way or the other.) > Or lectionary. The new Church of England Lectionary for "Common Worship" > isn't yet available on-line. That kind of thing would be good, though I'm not sure how it fits in with the module types. A 'calendar' type of module might be good. There is already the losung stuff (currently dictionary type) and there could be Spurgeons morning and evening as well. Thanks for your input :) Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 17:16:21 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:16:21 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: ; from trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:18:28PM +0000 References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <20010129131621.E684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:18:28PM +0000, Trevor Jenkins wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Daniel Glassey wrote: > > > I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as > > core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every > > module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which > > ones. > > I don't understand the reason for the Debian restriction. Some general > licencing with the modules' material or a Debianism? What about other > Linux distributions, e.g. RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE; subject to the same > restrictions? Sheer size. If/when the proposed (and as far as I know, approved in principle) "data" section is implemented, it is a problem to have multiple gigabytes of data added to Debian. We (Debian) are mirrored liberally around the world and cannot just dump tons of data into the main archive without providing a mechanism for making partial mirrors that omit the added bloat practical. > > These are my thoughts: > > I have radically different thoughts > > > KJV - it's standard (~2.2MB, less without Strongs ref.) > > 1 more modern translation - WEB (~1.4MB) > > The AV I can livest without thank thee muchly. Certainly a readable modern > translation should be core. Personally I'd like the CEV failing that the > NLT or the NET(*). Maybe the ISV or GW. The reason the KJV is helpful is Strong's. The suggestion that the KJV *and* a more modern translation should be included is, in my opinion, a very sensible one, if only because it allows the user to explore the full capabilities of sword. Besides, the user gets to choose whether one or the other or both texts are installed, as I explain below. > That is a translation is mandatory but nothing else. I don't think one > should specify which translation is core. Just that at least one must be > present for correct insttallation and operation. I might, for example, > only want a Swedish translation without any English text at all. Well, that could easily be accomplished with alternatives specified in libsword's dependencies. One translation will appear as the default but the user may opt to install one of the alternatives, e.g. Depends: sword-module-kjv | sword-module-web | sword-module-swedish (The package names above are for illustration purposes only. I'm not suggesting that they are good names :) Or this could even be expressed in terms of a "virtual package". That is, each package that provides a bible text would have "Provides: sword-bible-text" and then Dan would list in the libsword package: Depends: sword-module-kjv | sword-bible-text Both arrangements would make libsword install KJV by default, but would allow the user to override this by choosing a different Bible text instead. > The following are essential "nice to haves" but certainly shouldn't be > considered "core" modules. > > > 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) > > Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references (~800k) > > Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) I think "core" is the wrong term. "Core" suggests "stuff that libsword needs to work properly". It seems what we are looking for is a usable enough sampling of the modules available for sword that the package could be used with what Debian alone provides quite successfully by most (English-speaking) people. It gives the user an idea of what sword is capable of without having to provide every single module within Debian. Basically, the stuff that goes on this list will come off the Debian CD and anything else the user will have to haul off the Internet or order a sword text CD for. None of the additional modules other than the Bible text itself need to be considered a "Depends" for libsword. They could all simply be listed as "Suggests" which will list all of the modules that Dan will package. The "apt-get" tool does not do anything with "Suggests". Only those using a front-end like dselect will ever see the suggested additional modules, and none of the suggestions are enforced by the front-end. They are presented merely as optional extra stuff that the user may select if desired. Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 17:18:51 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:18:51 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <20010129085216.A1628@tdyc.com>; from rkrusty@tdyc.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:52:16AM -0700 References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> <20010129085216.A1628@tdyc.com> Message-ID: <20010129131851.F684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Dan wrote: > There's also a copyright issue. I assume the KJV with Strongs can't > be included because the Strongs formatting is copyrighted by Larry > Pierce. Is there an alternative version? argh. i missed this point, which knocks down my argument *for* Strongs. Ah well, my other points stand. :) Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 18:24:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:24:01 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <20010129131851.F684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca>; from synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 01:18:51PM -0400 References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> <20010129085216.A1628@tdyc.com> <20010129131851.F684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: <20010129142401.G684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 01:18:51PM -0400, Ben Armstrong wrote: > argh. i missed this point, which knocks down my argument *for* Strongs. er, *for* KJV I meant to say (I'm really not getting the hang of email today :) Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 18:34:10 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:34:10 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation Message-ID: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> I'd like to come at the copyright issue from a little different angle. With all due respect to Jonathan and his "Copyright Battle," it is going to be very difficult to convince publishers to give away the material that puts food on their table. Instead, why not begin an open content creation initiative? There are a few things to consider before circumventing the traditional publication process. For those interested I'd recommend reading a very interesting article, "Publishers: Who Needs Them?" by David J. A. Clines http://www.shef.ac.uk/~biblst/DJACcurrres/Publishers.html I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the goals be? What type of content should be created? Any feedback is welcome. Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 19:17:11 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:17:11 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <3A75A2DE.2291.1A48D02@localhost> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Daniel Glassey wrote: > On 29 Jan 2001, at 15:29, Daniel Glassey sent forth the message: > > > There's also a copyright issue. I assume the KJV with Strongs can't > > be included because the Strongs formatting is copyrighted by Larry > > Pierce. Is there an alternative version? > > Actually, this makes me think of an idea for another project. It's a > _lot_ of work probably, but Strongs numbers could be added to > WEB or another version. That would be a considerable project. One of my objections to the KJV is its formal equivalence translation philosophy. Some modern transaltions (perhaps, NKJV, NRSV) are also formal in philosophy. These can be tagged with Strong's numbers fairly easily. However, any meaning-based translations such as my preferred CEV would be a lot harder to give equivalence original words and English expressions. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 20:06:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 06:06:42 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian References: Message-ID: <3A75CD52.746576E8@bigfoot.com> Trevor Jenkins wrote: > ... > (*) Is any working on a NET module? I really like this translation and > have the HTML version on my workstation. The footnoting is prolific, with > every translational choice justified and corroborated. Wish that every > translation committee were that thorough. They usually are - it's just that we see the results of their labour, not the process. Most of the modern comittee translations had a very thorough review process. The reason we don't see the notes on them is probably cost. Most publishers would balk at printing that many notes that most people aren't going to read. > ... > I'd also be intersted in an ISV version That would be the "International Standard Version version"? :-) Sorry. It's a pet peeve of mine. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 20:42:40 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:42:40 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyrightmatters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyrightwebsite) In-Reply-To: <3A7545A2.8BD666FB@bigfoot.com> References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> <002501c0881f$72ea5f20$6a8a2d3f@family> <4.2.0.58.20010128110858.009fba20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010129093320.00ab3580@mail.dancris.com> Paul Gear wrote: >The main issues from my perspective are: >- that anyone should be able to use, copy, redistribute, and modify the >work in any form without the requirement for specific permission from >the author or payment of any licensing fee That is good. Some licenses require permission for a change to the semantic content but other changes do not need it. Some require or suggest that a copy of the new version be sent in, even if permission is not required. >- that the portions of the work attributable to each contributor be >clearly identifiable Good. >- that all derivative works be protected under the same conditions as >the original work Also good. Some allow for the changes to be placed in the Public Domain. But, that can create confusion as to which parts are protected and which are PD. >If i think the institution involved is not Christian and >their offence was serious enough, i would certainly consider asking my >legal counsel to write them a letter. It would not likely go as far as >court, simply because i would not likely feel it would be worth it, but >yes, i would contact them and tell them they are being bad. And then those that know what is going on, see that the license has no bite. But, because the idea of the license is to give things away, that may not be much of a problem. Not like MP3s where the copyright holders are trying keep from giving things away. >Because licenses are a concise way of stating the conditions under which >an author desires his or her work to be used, and because there are >several good ones available already, it is little effort to apply them >to new works. That is true. The effort is not so much in the placing of the license on the work, it is in enforcing it. But again, because this license is for giving things away, that may not be a big deal. >That's a good point. Do you think that using that sort of approach >means that the 'license' is more likely to be honoured? I personally do >not - i think people are less likely to violate a license than a >'statement of intent', simply because the modern Western world >understands the importance of legal terminology and for the most part is >rather litigation-averse. ;-) The statement of intent is more likely to be violated. If a difference in degree is the most important thing, then go with the license. The license may also encourage others by establishing that their free efforts can be added to a body of free works that will not be diverted for someone's gain. Their gain is not a big deal to me. The really ugly thing is the guy that creates a derivative work and releases it copyrighted without the license and prevents others from freely using his work. That would be a violation of the license. But, if he can't do it with your work he may not do it at all. Are we better off for that? It would be unfair, but there would be another new work. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 20:48:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:48:46 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Strong's numbers In-Reply-To: <3A75A2DE.2291.1A48D02@localhost> References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010129134453.00ab7100@mail.dancris.com> Being that WEB is somewhat in the KJV family, it may be an easier place to start. You could use the KJV Wigram as a guide. Jerry At 05:05 PM 1/29/2001 +0000, Daniel Glassey wrote: >Actually, this makes me think of an idea for another project. It's a >_lot_ of work probably, but Strongs numbers could be added to >WEB or another version. > >Daniel From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:13:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:13:01 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> I think that is a great idea. On the down side, does anyone want a Tom, Dick, and Harry commentary? I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry are. My guess is, there are a lot of Scholars out their that have works that have never been published. Rather than collect dust, they could be scanned (if scannable) and volunteers could work to make them Sword ready. Jerry At 12:34 PM 1/29/2001 -0600, Don A. Elbourne Jr. wrote: > >I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle >copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, >greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content >ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the >goals be? What type of content should be created? > >Any feedback is welcome. > > > >Don A. Elbourne Jr. >http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:36:23 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:23 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Chris Little wrote: > > (*) Is any working on a NET module? > > Because of their licensing restrictions, we would be unable to distribute > the NET, so I haven't bothered creating a module. It's on my todo list, but > comes after every other possible use of my time. Elsewhere I suggested a module creator for those who already have a local copy the translation. > > I'd also be intersted in an ISV version but I only have the RTF file > > generated from Microsoft Word. And then only the New Testament; last time > > I looked the Old Testament hadn't been completed. > > We have the ISV in SWORD format. As I found when I checked the web site as my message went out. Isn't that always the way. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:30:02 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:30:02 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <20010129131621.E684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Ben Armstrong wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:18:28PM +0000, Trevor Jenkins wrote: > > > The following are essential "nice to haves" but certainly shouldn't be > > considered "core" modules. > > > > > 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) > > > Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references (~800k) > > > Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) > > I think "core" is the wrong term. yes but ... > ... "Core" suggests "stuff that libsword > needs to work properly". The implication is greater than that. If only certain modules are included in the Debian distribution/mirrors that exactly what people will think. "These files are included in the distibution ergo they must be essential to the correct opertaion of the program." > It seems what we are looking for is a usable > enough sampling of the modules available for sword that the package could > be used with what Debian alone provides quite successfully by most > (English-speaking) people. It gives the user an idea of what sword is > capable of without having to provide every single module within Debian. Whilst that's a laudable intent I do not believe that this is how people will view the inclusion of a selected few modules. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:24:47 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:24:47 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Don A. Elbourne Jr. wrote: > I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle > copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, > greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content > ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the > goals be? What type of content should be created? I'll answer the last question first (a good Biblical principle) translation. But that's a huge task. Look at Eugene Petersen or J B Phillips. 10 years for the New Testament, which is the average for such work. There were over 100 people involved i the NIV tansaltion committees. Whilst my primary interest is in translation I've no desire what so ever to add to the plethora of English translations by creating another one. Especially as there is little to distinguish some of current FE based translations on the market. Maybe over time (three years, if I stuck to it) my notes from following the IVP "Search the Scripture" study plan. But I'm no Matthew Henry. > Any feedback is welcome. I think it infeasible to create new content for Sword just to get around copyright issues. More realistically picking up some of the PD works at CCEL would add commentary modules. Tools to help create personal modules from copyright material already in a user's possession would be better. For example a tool to convert the NET HTML pages into a sword module I could use would be great. Then others who have also got the same HTML files could create the identical module for themselves. For a de-PDF utility to create a GW module I can use instead of their downloadable PDF files. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:50:35 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (malbisse) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:50:35 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: Non-published works by scholars is a very interesting idea. Knowing the scholarly community, and a bit about the publishing community, it seems very likely to be true. Perhaps if something "official" was worked up in terms of an invitation to submit works for formatting for Sword, and then submitted to some of the scholarly e-lists such as b-greek, Xtalk, etc. it might open up some very interesting avenues. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Hastings" To: ; Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation > I think that is a great idea. On the down side, does anyone want a Tom, > Dick, and Harry commentary? I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry > are. My guess is, there are a lot of Scholars out their that have works > that have never been published. Rather than collect dust, they could be > scanned (if scannable) and volunteers could work to make them Sword ready. > > Jerry > > At 12:34 PM 1/29/2001 -0600, Don A. Elbourne Jr. wrote: > > > >I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle > >copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, > >greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content > >ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the > >goals be? What type of content should be created? > > > >Any feedback is welcome. > > > > > > > >Don A. Elbourne Jr. > >http://elbourne.org > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:58:58 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:58:58 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <01012922585802.07035@joachim> Something like the MAK commentary which si on crosswire.org? MAK = "Matthias Ansorgs Kommentar" = "Mathias Ansorg's Commentary" It's the personal commentary of my brother Matthias :) He used ThML and the formatting looks nice. Is this you talked about? --Joachim > I think that is a great idea. On the down side, does anyone want a Tom, > Dick, and Harry commentary? I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry > are. My guess is, there are a lot of Scholars out their that have works > that have never been published. Rather than collect dust, they could be > scanned (if scannable) and volunteers could work to make them Sword ready. > > Jerry > > At 12:34 PM 1/29/2001 -0600, Don A. Elbourne Jr. wrote: > > > >I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle > >copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, > >greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content > >ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the > >goals be? What type of content should be created? > > > >Any feedback is welcome. > > > > > > > >Don A. Elbourne Jr. > >http://elbourne.org -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 22:02:59 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:02:59 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01012923025903.07035@joachim> Hi! > On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Don A. Elbourne Jr. wrote: > > I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle > > copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, > > greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create > > content ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what > > should the goals be? What type of content should be created? > > I'll answer the last question first (a good Biblical principle) > translation. But that's a huge task. Look at Eugene Petersen or J B > Phillips. 10 years for the New Testament, which is the average for such > work. There were over 100 people involved i the NIV tansaltion committees. > Whilst my primary interest is in translation I've no desire what so ever > to add to the plethora of English translations by creating another one. > Especially as there is little to distinguish some of current FE based > translations on the market. Sure, this is true for emglish commentaries. But there are (for example) almsot no german commentaries available for free. So I'd really prefer some user-created commentary if they do not contain unscriptural content. > I think it infeasible to create new content for Sword just to get around > copyright issues. More realistically picking up some of the PD works at > CCEL would add commentary modules. But almost all texts on CCEL are in english. Joachim -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 22:16:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:16:36 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: ; from trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:30:02PM +0000 References: <20010129131621.E684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:30:02PM +0000, Trevor Jenkins wrote: > > ... "Core" suggests "stuff that libsword > > needs to work properly". > > The implication is greater than that. If only certain modules are included > in the Debian distribution/mirrors that exactly what people will > think. "These files are included in the distibution ergo they must be > essential to the correct opertaion of the program." That's simply not the way Debian works. Things basically get packaged for Debian on a demand basis. The "Depends" vs. "Suggests" makes it clear what is required and what is not. In no way does a package's presence in Debian indicate "essentialness" of that package. Have you ever really looked at Debian? It's *huge*. A Debian CD will contain all kinds of packages and only subsets of data for many of them. Nowhere does Debian represent the data sets provided as "essential". If people are getting that impression, it is merely from ignorance (i.e., not reading the docs). If Dan is really concerned about people not being led astray, he can place it prominently in the description of each module. "This is one of a sampling of modules for Sword which has been packaged for Debian. For the full range of available modules see ." Of course, that is assuming that the user even bothers to look at the package description ... but if they're not even doing that, I'm afraid there's no help for them if they are getting the wrong impression. > > It seems what we are looking for is a usable > > enough sampling of the modules available for sword that the package could > > be used with what Debian alone provides quite successfully by most > > (English-speaking) people. It gives the user an idea of what sword is > > capable of without having to provide every single module within Debian. > > Whilst that's a laudable intent I do not believe that this is how people > will view the inclusion of a selected few modules. Regardless of how they view it, there is a practical problem Dan has to resolve here that has nothing to do with peoples' impressions. There is no "data" section in Debian yet, so he cannot burden the many Debian mirrors with the full range of distributable modules available for Sword. Therefore, it is necessary to select some subset of modules for starters. I believe it should be representative enough so that people can get a taste of what is available. This is exactly the same situation as Debian has with themeable window managers. There are many, many themes available. Debian doesn't package all of them. Instead, a subset of them are selected by the maintainer based on whatever criteria ("usability", "good looking", "small") the maintainer deems to be appropriate. If/when the user decides to try out some other themes, they have all of themes.org to select from. It should be the same way with Sword's modules. The modules packaged for Debian should satisfy the new Sword user's curiosity. Additionally, it would be nice to include a *useful* subset of modules, as some users will not have the means to easily obtain additional modules (e.g. if the user is not the person responsible for installing the package on the system, or the user doesn't have the bandwidth, etc.) Basically, it is up to Dan to decide which modules get included. Of course, it is also up to the Debian archive maintainer to put on the brakes if Dan decides to add 500M of modules to Debian, so Dan has to choose wisely. :) If I read his original request correctly, then, it was for advice in coming up with this subset of modules, not to decide what is "essential" and what is "not essential". The problem is simply one of arriving at a "best compromise" given the space constraints in the main archive. Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 22:33:08 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:33:08 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Ben Armstrong wrote: > Have you ever really > looked at Debian? No. I thought it was implicit in my original reply that I do not use Debian. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 00:28:49 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:28:49 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: ; from trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:33:08PM +0000 References: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:33:08PM +0000, Trevor Jenkins wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Ben Armstrong wrote: > > > Have you ever really > > looked at Debian? > > No. I thought it was implicit in my original reply that I do not use > Debian. Not really. Just that you didn't know about their policies. I didn't get an impression one way or the other what you do know about Debian. Well, as it stands today it takes 3 CDs to hold all of the binary packages for Debian "main". That number is only going to go up. I wouldn't be surprised if the next release required 4 CDs. Debian tries to combat that bloat a bit by not including a whole lot of data with the packages. Where a package requires lots of data, it is preferable to point to some other source for that data and not include it. With the addition of the "data" section there would no longer be that problem, as Debian mirrors (and CD vendors) could choose whether to carry the data or not. So it is possible that at some point all freely distributable Sword modules will be included in Debian. How much data are we talking about anyway? Which modules can be freely redistributed by anyone? Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 00:43:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Geoffrey W Hastings) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:43:34 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Strong's numbers Message-ID: <20010129.164334.-575969.0.geoffreyhastings@juno.com> On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:48:46 -0700 Jerry Hastings writes: > Being that WEB is somewhat in the KJV family, it may be an easier > place to > start. You could use the KJV Wigram as a guide. What about the American King James. Reading about the translation it sounds like it is pretty much the same as KJV with the "eths" dropped of words like "saith doeth etceth....:-) " And other cleanups to the text. > > Jerry > > At 05:05 PM 1/29/2001 +0000, Daniel Glassey wrote: > > >Actually, this makes me think of an idea for another project. It's > a > >_lot_ of work probably, but Strongs numbers could be added to > >WEB or another version. > > > >Daniel > ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 00:50:08 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jason VanScyoc) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:50:08 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: <00ae01c08a56$98a14420$0b00a8c0@LocalHost> In this e-mail, I will use the term 'works' to mean content (like a book), tools (like the Sword Project), lectures, Bible translations, etc. It is my understanding that God's works are created or done for the promotion of God's Truth. If this was not the intent behind a given work, I don't want to spend any of my resources promoting it. I believe that people are suppose to put God's will first in their life ... to allow Jesus to be their King, and only King. On one hand, let's consider someone who was being lead by God to create a 'work'. Did God tell them to place limits on how it can be distributed? I doubt it, but if God did tell them to restrict it's distribution, in any way, who are we to try and change it? The only restriction I can think of that was placed on the Bible was to not change it. (I am primarily thinking of Revelation.) So, was that the first content license? But on the other hand, when someone is creating a work, they do have to be careful to not have their primary motivation be anything but doing God's will. Satan has quite a bit of success getting people to fall for the money motivation. I think second to that would be fame ... a persons ego, or pride - they want their name associated with this great work. The third would be fear ... I encountered this when talking to the leader behind one of the Bible translations ... he seemed to be afraid that someone would steal his, and his translator's, work and corrupt it. I don't want to spend any of my time trying to overcome the restrictions that someone has placed on their work - if they change them on their own ok - but, if someone feels lead by God to try and negotiate with them - or if they want to track the progress of the copyrighted translations, go for it. I wouldn't mind knowing when they become free myself. Jason From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 03:08:26 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (sword-devel@crosswire.org) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:08:26 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: Message-ID: <3A76302A.8CDAA3A@gte.net> Trevor Jenkins wrote: > > Tools to help create personal modules from copyright material already in a > user's possession would be better. For example a tool to convert the NET > HTML pages into a sword module I could use would be great. Then others who > have also got the same HTML files could create the identical module for > themselves. For a de-PDF utility to create a GW module I can use instead > of their downloadable PDF files. There are various PDF to X tools in already in existance (where X is Text, HTML, etc.). I would think it would be fairly easy to take one of those as a starting point and create your own back end to create a new X. I recently used "pdftotext" the other day and found it very helpful. Kevin From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 04:17:59 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:17:59 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: <000f01c08a73$a7b80120$6b8c2d3f@family> Hello Everyone, Wow, all this discussion. I just wanted to add my couple of thoughts. (I only have a finite amount of them! ;) ) I believe that an open content license would be a great idea, I love the idea of being able to distribute a 'work' and give people the ability to use it without worrying about getting my permission. In fact I am going to go into the Christian content business in the future, and everything that I and my company does will be distributed under an open content license. But this would only help us, as the Sword Project team, for future works or works that we could get people to license under an open content type of a license. For all the translations, etc. that people already use and are not under this type of license and would probably never be under the open content umbrella, we need to do something else to get those works distributed. In copyright law all we need to do is get the copyright holder to grant permission for us to distribute their work(s). That is what I am doing, it would be great to have a translation that was open content or a commentary that is open content, if they were the caliber of the NIV, NKJV and what we have now. So this is where we are at and that is what I am doing, trying to get things distributed under the 'license' it is under now and that is just copyright law (I know copyright is probably not a license but you understand the analogy.) It will be interesting to see the reaction from publishers when I start sending out official letters this spring, I am sure we will be surprised to see what happens. With that in mind what do people think of the official letter I plan to send? Check it out at the Copyright Website: http://www.crosswire.org/sword/copyright/ I have not had any feedback about it! And whoever made the comment about how we need to make module making easy, amen to that! Maybe some documentation or simple tools to be used. In Christ, Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don A. Elbourne Jr." To: Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 10:34 AM Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation > I'd like to come at the copyright issue from a little different angle. With > all due respect to Jonathan and his "Copyright Battle," it is going to be > very difficult to convince publishers to give away the material that puts > food on their table. Instead, why not begin an open content creation > initiative? > > There are a few things to consider before circumventing the traditional > publication process. For those interested I'd recommend reading a very > interesting article, "Publishers: Who Needs Them?" by David J. A. Clines > http://www.shef.ac.uk/~biblst/DJACcurrres/Publishers.html > > I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle > copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, > greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content > ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the > goals be? What type of content should be created? > > Any feedback is welcome. > > > > Don A. Elbourne Jr. > http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 08:40:48 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:40:48 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] New Sword CD References: <01012218013800.00713@joachim> <3A6D618C.C0A0C4CE@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <003601c08a98$5ae31ef0$0101a8c0@gandalf> Hi troy and all the others, I read a lot about an upcoming CD. Since my bandwidth is only ISDN, I would like to order a CD-rom. Is it possible, where (and how) do you want the money, and what does it cost? * or am I asking old questions again? * :) Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Troy A. Griffitts" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] New Sword CD > I'm gonna give it a few more days as others have expressed interest in > updating things. > > And this morning I got caught up again with CD orders. We're good thru > December with the last of what I had. It worked out just right, so I > think a few days won't hurt. > > -Troy. > > > > Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > Troy, I put some stuff of the alpha pages into BETA/win/ > > > > These are: > > > > vpl2mod.exe, mod2vpl.exe, sword-1.51a.exe, locales.zip and prn2sword.exe. > > > > I hope this is OK and the right directory, if you dislike it please remove > > them. > > > > I also updates some HOWTO/* files, some READMEs etc. > > I also updates the GnomeSword sources to the newest release. > > > > I think we should also update the binary in the root of the CD, but I don't > > have one. Could you do it, please? > > > > Thank you Troy! > > > > Joachim > > -- > > Joachim Ansorg > > BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de > > BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 14:04:00 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Will) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:04:00 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> <000f01c08a73$a7b80120$6b8c2d3f@family> Message-ID: <004101c08ac5$8239f280$bf3fd6d1@0020505357> The whole open content question, and Joachim and Malbisse's messages, suggested some things to me. What about getting volunteers to translate some of the commentaries and other material that is PD and available at CCEL and similar sites? Putting that material into German, French, Spanish, etc. would be a tremendous service, and it would not be "Tom, Dick or Harry" content. I'm not certain if this would work, but I wonder if running a page or two through one of the machine translation services on the Net would produce a good "jumping-off" point. Someone who knows the language could then go over it, polish it somewhat, add or correct specific theological terms, and pass the rough translation on to a native speaker of that language. That might take a lot of the brute force work out of translating it, and set up a sort of international assembly line. Any thoughts. Also, I wonder if Malbisse's suggestion could be carried out. There must be a lot of theology professors out there with unpublished manuscripts, class notes, etc. that will never see print for profit. What about contacting a few people and seeing if they want to contribute to a world-wide open source library? Also, Jonathan, I agree with you on the problem of existing works that are not open content and unlikely to be so. But I also was wondering about another approach to these publishers. What about all of the back-listed books that they hold copyright on but are never likely to re-issue for various reasons? Might some of the publishers be willing to work with the Sword Project on permission to use these more dated works, even when they are unwilling to license use of their latest projects? Just a few more thoughts. Will From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 15:36:09 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:36:09 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] New Sword CD In-Reply-To: <003601c08a98$5ae31ef0$0101a8c0@gandalf> References: <01012218013800.00713@joachim> <3A6D618C.C0A0C4CE@crosswire.org> <003601c08a98$5ae31ef0$0101a8c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <01013016360900.00519@joachim> Hi! On www.bibletime.de we (we are the team of BibleTime) offer to ship the crosswire Sword CD in Europe. Have a look at that page. --Joachim > Hi troy and all the others, > > I read a lot about an upcoming CD. Since my bandwidth is > only ISDN, I would like to order a CD-rom. > Is it possible, where (and how) do you want the money, > and what does it cost? > > * or am I asking old questions again? * :) > > Peter > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Troy A. Griffitts" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 11:48 AM > Subject: Re: [sword-devel] New Sword CD > > > I'm gonna give it a few more days as others have expressed interest in > > updating things. > > > > And this morning I got caught up again with CD orders. We're good thru > > December with the last of what I had. It worked out just right, so I > > think a few days won't hurt. > > > > -Troy. > > > > Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > Troy, I put some stuff of the alpha pages into BETA/win/ > > > > > > These are: > > > > > > vpl2mod.exe, mod2vpl.exe, sword-1.51a.exe, locales.zip and > > prn2sword.exe. > > > > I hope this is OK and the right directory, if you dislike it please > > remove > > > > them. > > > > > > I also updates some HOWTO/* files, some READMEs etc. > > > I also updates the GnomeSword sources to the newest release. > > > > > > I think we should also update the binary in the root of the CD, but I > > don't > > > > have one. Could you do it, please? > > > > > > Thank you Troy! > > > > > > Joachim > > > -- > > > Joachim Ansorg > > > BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de > > > BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 15:38:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:38:01 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: [bt-devel] fast search In-Reply-To: <3A75FAD0.E51D3DA8@crosswire.org> References: <3A75FAD0.E51D3DA8@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <01013016380101.00519@joachim> Hi! > Hey guys. Saw a few messages about indexed searching... > > Just wanted to say, current impl of index searching wreaks. It was > never intended to be used. It was an afternoon of work intended to be > an example of how to 'plug in' a new searching engine into the new > search framework. > > We had a number of people starting to write different search engines and > I wanted to faciliate them and give them an example. > > None of them actually ever submitted their code, so we are left only > with my cheezy example. > > Fast searching is still a todo item, so hopefully someone will take it > up as their project. > > Any takers? :) Maybe Trevor?? > -Troy. -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 20:06:21 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:06:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] Re: [bt-devel] fast search In-Reply-To: <01013016380101.00519@joachim> Message-ID: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > Fast searching is still a todo item, so hopefully someone will take it > > up as their project. > > > > Any takers? :) > > Maybe Trevor?? Yes. Now that my ME is going away I can begin to pick up the things that got dropped over the last 15 months. But I have to introduce them back gradually. Give me a little while to get the latest source tar-ball and look at what you (Troy) put in. I also need time to retrieve my email of my old Apple PowerBook, which I was using then; I recall that there were some discussions on some of the issues. But consider me in. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 20:36:28 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:36:28 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword Message-ID: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> I had a cool idea I want to share with you (at leat IMHO is cool ;) At the moment we have the problem, that Bible societies won't give us their texts for Sword. I think it's too unsecure for them to give them to OpenSource programs, because the security system can be removed by everybody. In a closed source application this is not true, it's a program like OLB, Bible Workshop or another commonly used Bible application. The security systems can't be removed (only by good crackers), the texts can be encrypted with good algorithms. For this solution we need a commercial Bible program, if it's possible for almost all plattforms the same program. My solution for this would be to put Sword under LGPL, program a good Bible study program and sell the program. The price should be enough to cover the expenses for module licenses etc., but it shouldn't by high. Only the commercial modules will be sold, the modules without copyright will be free. This would be the first cross-plattform application, which runs on WIndows / Linux / Mac (?) etc, which is cheap, has lots of freely available modules and which supports the copyrighted modules. What do you think? Joachim -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 21:58:03 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:58:03 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> Message-ID: I'm totally interested in doing something like this. I really don't know how we would organize a commercial venture though. As an alternative to putting Sword under LGPL, thereby allowing other non-open source groups/companies to benefit from Sword, I would suggest licensing Sword to the commercial group specifically under a non-GPL license. That way, the commercial group can distribute binary-only software under a commercial license while Sword-proper remains GPL. I'm not sure how security could be improved over what OLB, Logos, etc. offer. But I suppose we can at least offer security on par with these titles. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 01:16:00 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:16:00 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword References: Message-ID: <3A776750.BDACAFA8@crosswire.org> Do engineers really think our security is LESS secure than other Bible software. I thought it was much more secure. I understand that the non-technical publisher MAY think that since we are opensource, our security may be less secure, but we're using 128-bit on the fly encryption (which could be increased if we chose to increase our key sizes) I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module without having the unlock key. -Troy. Chris Little wrote: > > I'm totally interested in doing something like this. I really don't know > how we would organize a commercial venture though. > > As an alternative to putting Sword under LGPL, thereby allowing other > non-open source groups/companies to benefit from Sword, I would suggest > licensing Sword to the commercial group specifically under a non-GPL > license. That way, the commercial group can distribute binary-only software > under a commercial license while Sword-proper remains GPL. > > I'm not sure how security could be improved over what OLB, Logos, etc. > offer. But I suppose we can at least offer security on par with these > titles. > > --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 01:21:53 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:21:53 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian References: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> Regarding the KJV and Larry Pierce. We obtained permission to use Larry's text with strongs numbers as a base for a freely available SWORD module. I wouldn't have thought that we had a copyright issue. NONE of our TEXTS are GPL (not sure if that would make sense for anything other than a 'living document'), many are PD. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 01:49:13 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 17:49:13 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <3A776750.BDACAFA8@crosswire.org> Message-ID: > I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > without having the unlock key. Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 02:25:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:25:46 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org>; from scribe@crosswire.org on Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 06:21:53PM -0700 References: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <20010130222546.R684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 06:21:53PM -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > Regarding the KJV and Larry Pierce. > > We obtained permission to use Larry's text with strongs numbers as a > base for a freely available SWORD module. > > I wouldn't have thought that we had a copyright issue. NONE of our > TEXTS are GPL (not sure if that would make sense for anything other than > a 'living document'), many are PD. The issue is "freely redistributable". If Debian needs to be granted special permission to redistribute the data, then it cannot be included. Please see http://www.debian.org/social_contract thorough account of which freedoms a package's license needs to provide in order to be included in Debian. In particular, any license requiring special permission to redistribute would fail: 8. License Must Not Be Specific to Debian The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of a Debian system. If the program is extracted from Debian and used or distributed without Debian but otherwise within the terms of the program's license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the Debian system. It all depends on the nature of your agreement with Larry. If this kind of free redistribution is what he intended, then it should be explicitly stated in the license for the package that the author has granted this freedom, otherwise Debian is unable to include his work. Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 02:41:57 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 19:41:57 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword References: Message-ID: <3A777B75.63F17B20@crosswire.org> >> I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module >> without having the unlock key. >Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. Yes. Agreed, but is that any different than a win98 key, et. al.? I don't think we want to solve the software industry's copyright violation problems, just make violating them sufficiently difficult and blatant. Thoughts? -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 02:38:17 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ted Rolle) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:38:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Chris Little wrote: > > > I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > > without having the unlock key. > > Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. > > --Chris Yes. I guess integrity would be the only thing stopping someone.... From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 03:01:17 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:01:17 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian References: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> <20010130222546.R684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: <3A777FFD.84FE96BA@crosswire.org> Ben, Thanks, I'll further clarify this with Larry and keep ya posted. -Troy. Ben Armstrong wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 06:21:53PM -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > > Regarding the KJV and Larry Pierce. > > > > We obtained permission to use Larry's text with strongs numbers as a > > base for a freely available SWORD module. > > > > I wouldn't have thought that we had a copyright issue. NONE of our > > TEXTS are GPL (not sure if that would make sense for anything other than > > a 'living document'), many are PD. > > The issue is "freely redistributable". If Debian needs to > be granted special permission to redistribute the data, then it > cannot be included. > > Please see http://www.debian.org/social_contract > thorough account of which freedoms a package's license needs to > provide in order to be included in Debian. In particular, any > license requiring special permission to redistribute would fail: > > 8. License Must Not Be Specific to Debian > The rights attached to the program must not depend on the > program's being part of a Debian system. If the program is > extracted from Debian and used or distributed without Debian but > otherwise within the terms of the program's license, all parties > to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights > as those that are granted in conjunction with the Debian system. > > It all depends on the nature of your agreement with Larry. If this > kind of free redistribution is what he intended, then it should be > explicitly stated in the license for the package that the author has > granted this freedom, otherwise Debian is unable to include his work. > > Ben > -- > nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca > Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org > [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] > [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 02:53:32 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Todd Shirey) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:53:32 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <3A777B75.63F17B20@crosswire.org> Message-ID: ...Generate a key based on a MAC address - if there is no network card installed generate the key from the OEM number from the hard drive. In either case the legal user of a module couldn't share the key with anyone. The key would work only on the machine for which it was generated. We do this with our commercial software. Todd -----Original Message----- From: owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org [mailto:owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org]On Behalf Of Troy A. Griffitts Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 9:42 PM To: sword-devel@crosswire.org Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword >> I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module >> without having the unlock key. >Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. Yes. Agreed, but is that any different than a win98 key, et. al.? I don't think we want to solve the software industry's copyright violation problems, just make violating them sufficiently difficult and blatant. Thoughts? -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 03:32:30 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (allen goforth) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:32:30 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword References: <3A776750.BDACAFA8@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <001a01c08b36$9a6fffe0$0300a8c0@p3600laptop> unsubscribe "We grow arid not for lack of wonders by for lack of wonder." --G. K. Chesterton ----- Original Message ----- From: "Troy A. Griffitts" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword > Do engineers really think our security is LESS secure than other Bible > software. I thought it was much more secure. > > I understand that the non-technical publisher MAY think that since we > are opensource, our security may be less secure, but we're using 128-bit > on the fly encryption (which could be increased if we chose to increase > our key sizes) > > I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > without having the unlock key. > > -Troy. > > > > Chris Little wrote: > > > > I'm totally interested in doing something like this. I really don't know > > how we would organize a commercial venture though. > > > > As an alternative to putting Sword under LGPL, thereby allowing other > > non-open source groups/companies to benefit from Sword, I would suggest > > licensing Sword to the commercial group specifically under a non-GPL > > license. That way, the commercial group can distribute binary-only software > > under a commercial license while Sword-proper remains GPL. > > > > I'm not sure how security could be improved over what OLB, Logos, etc. > > offer. But I suppose we can at least offer security on par with these > > titles. > > > > --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 23:47:28 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (sword-devel@crosswire.org) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:47:28 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: ; from Todd@Dental-Com.com on Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 09:53:32PM -0500 References: <3A777B75.63F17B20@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <20010130234728.A572@toshiba> On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 09:53:32PM -0500, Todd Shirey wrote: > ...Generate a key based on a MAC address - if there is no network card > installed generate the key from the OEM number from the hard drive. In > either case the legal user of a module couldn't share the key with anyone. > The key would work only on the machine for which it was generated. We do > this with our commercial software. > > Todd > This seems to me a very bad idea. If the user changes his network card, which I am planning on doing in my machine shortly, or changes his hard drive, which I have done twice within the past year and a half or so, what is he going to do? If there is a method for regenerating the key that does not require paying more money, then that can be used for pirated copies. If not, then the user must pay out more money when any piece of hardware to which the licenses have been tied has been changed. I am presently attempting to break this sort of protection on an old Mavis Beacon program we have, because the machine it was installed on was thrown away and all we have is a backup copy that detects that the hardware is different that what it was installed on. We payed for the software, but we can't use it. On the other hand, any method for protection which does not tie the license to the hardware or some other piece of software which the program should not mess with must (MS Office seems to use font files) must necessarily be insufficient to prevent piracy. The problem is really a conundrum that cannot be solved without being a pain to the customer. Bruce Schneier has an insightful artical on copyright protection at http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-9811.html. There is no truly secure way to do this, as Schneier shows so well. The only thing is to make it just difficult enough to keep honest folks honest. Alexander Garden > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org > [mailto:owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org]On Behalf Of Troy A. Griffitts > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 9:42 PM > To: sword-devel@crosswire.org > Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible > program based on Sword > > > >> I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > >> without having the unlock key. > > >Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. > > Yes. Agreed, but is that any different than a win98 key, et. al.? > I don't think we want to solve the software industry's copyright > violation problems, just make violating them sufficiently difficult and > blatant. > > Thoughts? > -Troy. > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 23:51:29 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (sword-devel@crosswire.org) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:51:29 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: ; from chrislit@chiasma.org on Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:58:03PM -0800 References: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> Message-ID: <20010130235129.B572@toshiba> On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:58:03PM -0800, Chris Little wrote: > I'm totally interested in doing something like this. I really don't know > how we would organize a commercial venture though. > > As an alternative to putting Sword under LGPL, thereby allowing other > non-open source groups/companies to benefit from Sword, I would suggest > licensing Sword to the commercial group specifically under a non-GPL > license. That way, the commercial group can distribute binary-only software > under a commercial license while Sword-proper remains GPL. > > I'm not sure how security could be improved over what OLB, Logos, etc. > offer. But I suppose we can at least offer security on par with these > titles. > > --Chris > > Perhaps the company could just provide a plug-in component that Sword would call to handle encrypted modules. The encrypted modules would also be provided by the company and could be included on the Sword CD after an agreement was signed. This way Sword itself could remain clearly open source and cooperation would be easier. Alexander Garden From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 06:27:15 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:27:15 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > ...Generate a key based on a MAC address - if there is no network card > installed generate the key from the OEM number from the hard drive. In > either case the legal user of a module couldn't share the key with anyone. > The key would work only on the machine for which it was generated. We do > this with our commercial software. That seems a bit extreme. Besides, I'm not sure how we would manage distributing modules with such unique keys. I guess we could use the MAC/OEM to encode/encrypt the real cipher key. For example, an unlocker utility sends our server your MAC/OEM, and it replies with a key that must be decrypted with your MAC/OEM to reveal the real key (which would be the same for all users). I suspect we'd get a lot of angry users though, when people started changing their hard drives & NICs. Here's a novel idea... maybe there are some commercial Bible software developers out there who would be interested in adopting an open source project, merging with us, or just marketing modules in our format. Maybe Larry Pierce/OLB since we seem to have (somewhat) similar markets and goals? Maybe OliveTree since our products /don't/ have similar markets (but mostly because I know they're on the list and have mentioned interest in OS)? Maybe Logos/Libronix because I assume there must be some reason Bob Pritchett is interested in being on the list? --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 06:50:22 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:50:22 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <20010130235129.B572@toshiba> Message-ID: > Perhaps the company could just provide a plug-in component that Sword > would call to handle encrypted modules. The encrypted modules would > also be provided by the company and could be included on the Sword CD > after an agreement was signed. This way Sword itself could remain > clearly open source and cooperation would be easier. The problem I see with this is the ability to write exporters. An example of this would be the console front end diatheke. In one command, you can have it print an entire work, even if it is encrypted. If Sword remained open-source and just send calls to a closed-source dynamically-linked/shared-object library plug-in, anyone could copy the calls to their own program, make an exporter, and circumvent the protection entirely. What we could do is have an open-source front-end that used a statically-linked, closed-source, and undistributed library. That way, the front-end can go on being open-source, but would not be usable for locked modules unless it was the commercial version linked with the decryption library. It would still come down to the security of a single key though. I suspect that our security, as it stands, is as strong as any of the commercial products', despite our being open source. Without the key, you're going to have to do a nasty brute force attack on every module you want to crack. Most of the commercial modules are much less secure, relying instead on proprietary file formats and lists of texts to reveal/hide from the front-end rather than actual encryption. Logos is supposed to have numerous security models to meet a publisher's needs in their next version. We could implement something similar, ranging from simple key unlocks to hard-drive tied unlocks to online-viewing only unlocks. It might encourage publishers to increase nasty restrictions on use, however, so we might do well to pretend this possibility doesn't exist. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 06:53:29 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:53:29 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010130234935.009fa240@mail.dancris.com> Good idea. Those lists could be just the place. We don't want to look like we are spaming the lists though. Any thought on how best to approach it? Jerry At 04:50 PM 1/29/2001 -0500, malbisse wrote: >Non-published works by scholars is a very interesting idea. Knowing the >scholarly community, and a bit about the publishing community, it seems very >likely to be true. > >Perhaps if something "official" was worked up in terms of an invitation to >submit works for formatting for Sword, and then submitted to some of the >scholarly e-lists such as b-greek, Xtalk, etc. it might open up some very >interesting avenues. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 07:17:40 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:17:40 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <01012922585802.07035@joachim> References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010130235548.009fd1b0@mail.dancris.com> Joachim Ansorg wrote: >Something like the MAK commentary which si on crosswire.org? > >MAK = "Matthias Ansorgs Kommentar" = "Mathias Ansorg's Commentary" > >It's the personal commentary of my brother Matthias :) Good thing your brother's name isn't Tom, Dick or Harry. :-) But as I said, "I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry are." And we now know who Matthias is. He is your brother. He is not some unknown Tom, Dick, or Harry. (At least to you.) :-) Don't get me wrong. If we get a TDH commentary we should offer it, if it is good. But a lot of users will want credentials. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 07:26:43 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:26:43 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <20010130222546.R684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> References: <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131002043.00ab9790@mail.dancris.com> This is a good example of why we should try to be as pure as we can in having modules that are "open" or PD. Jerry Ben Armstrong wrote: >The issue is "freely redistributable". If Debian needs to >be granted special permission to redistribute the data, then it >cannot be included. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 07:46:49 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Robyn Manning) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 18:16:49 +1030 Subject: [sword-devel] enabling NIV Message-ID: <01013118164900.01453@kanga> Hi all I'm waiting for a project to do and meanwhile am checking out the program. I don't understand how to unencrypt NIV bible. Help would be greatly appreciated. TIA Robyn From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 08:16:45 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:16:45 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010131002043.00ab9790@mail.dancris.com> References: <20010130222546.R684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131010000.009fb5f0@mail.dancris.com> At 12:26 AM 1/31/2001 -0700, Jerry Hastings wrote: >>This is a good example of why we should try to be as pure >>as we can in having modules that are "open" or PD. >What do you mean by "be as pure as we can?" I mean that we should try to have a free, and open or PD version of a module when we can. There are PD KJV texts. We should promote one of them over a restricted KJV module. The modules that are free downloads, no keys needed, and are "open" or PD should standout and be promoted more than the others. >Why don't you say what you mean? To tired. >It is after 1:00am. Go to bed. Ok Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 08:29:12 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:29:12 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <004101c08ac5$8239f280$bf3fd6d1@0020505357> References: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> <000f01c08a73$a7b80120$6b8c2d3f@family> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131011722.009f92d0@mail.dancris.com> At 09:04 AM 1/30/2001 -0500, Will wrote: >What about getting volunteers to translate some of the commentaries and >other >material that is PD and available at CCEL and similar sites? Putting that >material >into German, French, Spanish, etc. would be a tremendous service, and it >would >not be "Tom, Dick or Harry" content. That could work. You want a good proofreader for the language in question. >machine translation Machines produce very bad grammar. Even worse than mine. But, it would be an interesting experiment to see if after it was proofread and edited if it would be quality and time efficient. >What about contacting a few people and seeing >if they want >to contribute to a world-wide open source library? Perhaps Troy can set up a public FTP incoming for it. If not, I can provide one. We just need someone with an unpublished work. >What about all of the back-listed books that they hold >copyright on >but are never likely to re-issue for various reasons? Might some of the >publishers be >willing to work with the Sword Project on permission to use these more dated >works, Worth a shot. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 08:38:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (James Gross) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:38:36 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation Message-ID:
>Good thing your brother's name isn't Tom, Dick or Harry. :-) But
>as I
>said, "I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry are." And we
>now
>know who Matthias is. He is your brother. He is not some unknown
>Tom, Dick,
>or Harry. (At least to you.) :-)
>
>Don't get me wrong. If we get a TDH commentary we should offer it,
>if it is
>good. But a lot of users will want credentials.
>
>Jerry
How about those of us who are not programmers setting up an advisory/review board.  We could ensure that the commentaries are Biblically sound.  We could have an application process where there needs to be at least one, if not two, pastor recommendations.  That way, we are able to say that the individuals on the board are not from a cult.  Additionally, we could make sure that more than one person reviews each commentary (so that we get more than one set of eyes looking for non-Biblical content).  We could also be looking for typographical/formatting errors.  Just a thought.
 
Jim

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 09:41:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:41:36 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131015304.009fc6a0@mail.dancris.com> Another great idea! I like it. Need to be careful with the "cult" word though. Open source software development is not a good place to practice counter cult methods. For reasons like that, a text review board should probably not be "official" and should have some distance between it and Crosswire. But, it would be nice to see a review of "unknown" works. One day I may want to see something written from a certain point of view. On another day I may want to look at something written from a differing point of view. It would be nice to have an idea of what way a work leans. And to know the quality of the writing. Jerry At 08:38 AM 1/31/2001 +0000, James Gross wrote: >How about those of us who are not programmers setting up an >advisory/review board. We could ensure that the commentaries are >Biblically sound. We could have an application process where there needs >to be at least one, if not two, pastor recommendations. That way, we are >able to say that the individuals on the board are not from a >cult. Additionally, we could make sure that more than one person reviews >each commentary (so that we get more than one set of eyes looking for >non-Biblical content). We could also be looking for >typographical/formatting errors. Just a thought. > >Jim > > >---------- >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at >http://explorer.msn.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 12:12:49 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:12:49 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword References: <3A776750.BDACAFA8@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <3A780141.58A5E2E9@bigfoot.com> "Troy A. Griffitts" wrote: > > Do engineers really think our security is LESS secure than other Bible > software. I thought it was much more secure. > > I understand that the non-technical publisher MAY think that since we > are opensource, our security may be less secure, but we're using 128-bit > on the fly encryption (which could be increased if we chose to increase > our key sizes) > > I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > without having the unlock key. Troy, did you read my last post about copyright/module unlocking? What about you, Chris? I really would like to know how you think we can have a free software unlocking system that handles key management securely. If you can see some holes in my argument, please let me know. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 12:59:57 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (James Gross) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 12:59:57 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation Message-ID:





>From: Jerry Hastings
>Reply-To: sword-devel@crosswire.org
>To: sword-devel@crosswire.org, sword-devel@crosswire.org
>Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation
>Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:41:36 -0700
>
>Another great idea! I like it. Need to be careful with the "cult" word
>though.

Good point. 

>Open source software development is not a good place to
>practice counter cult methods. For reasons like that, a text review board
>should probably not be "official" and should have some distance between it
>and Crosswire. But, it would be nice to see a review of "unknown" works.
>One day I may want to see something written from a certain point of
>view. On another day I may want to look at something written from a differing
>point of view. It would be nice to have an idea of what way a work leans.
>And to know the quality of the writing. 
>Jerry

Well, your ideas are great IMHO. Since we would need a person or persons to receive the works and prepare them for inclusion in Sword, they could also, possibly, review them and provide a short synopsis of the works.  I am no theologian, so I would dare not think that I could say whether something was "cult"-like or not.  I just know my Bible (though, not as well as I should).  So, I hope I didn't insult anyone when I included the "cult" word in the previous email.  I am just throwing out ideas.

In a similar vein, I will be working on short synopsis' of all of the modules.  That way, when we update the website, we can provide the synopsis' for the benefit of the user.  If anyone has already been working on such thing, please let me know. 

In Christ's Service

Jim

 


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 13:59:10 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Martin Gruner) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:10 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> References: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> Message-ID: <01013114591001.00585@martin> > At the moment we have the problem, that Bible societies won't give us their > texts for Sword. > I think it's too unsecure for them to give them to OpenSource programs, > because the security system can be removed by everybody. > > In a closed source application this is not true, it's a program like OLB, > Bible Workshop or another commonly used Bible application. > The security systems can't be removed (only by good crackers), the texts > can be encrypted with good algorithms. > > For this solution we need a commercial Bible program, if it's possible for > almost all plattforms the same program. I do not really understand this. How would the problem be solved by selling the programs and modules? There is software contains the "commercial" modules that users can buy, why should sword go the same way? > My solution for this would be to put Sword under LGPL, program a good Bible > study program and sell the program. This will involve a lot of work, and the users of the opensource bible programs like bibletime will not profit from it. Especially those who do not have the money to buy a program. What about another way to do it? For this aim it would not be necessary to create and sell a program; it might be sufficient to change towards another security architecture that can be published opensource; maybe just use libraries like openssl etc. -- might be necessary anyway for not having to use the same keys. This way the encrypted modules would be safe; and users wanting them could buy the modules while using their common sword frontend. Frontend programs would not have to be changed. > The price should be enough to cover the expenses for module licenses etc., > but it shouldn't by high. > Only the commercial modules will be sold, the modules without copyright > will be free. Martin From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 15:09:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (malbisse) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:09:34 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010130234935.009fa240@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: The best way to avoid the appearance of spamming is to write to the moderator, not to the list itself, explaining what the Sword Project is and what it is trying to accomplish as an open source project. A well-worded letter, explaining that full credit would be given to the author of the the module/commentary in the module itself, and on any web-sites where it is posted, would go a long way toward assuring that academics would be willing to give permission for their works to be included. I know that on some of my web searches, I've already seen complete, out-of-print books posted on a variety of theological topics by the authors themselves. I don't know why anyone who has done that would hesitate to give permission for world-wide distribution of their work. They would retain copyright, so that other Bible program publishers would not be able to simply include their works in for-profit programs. That might even encourage some of these other publisheres to offer to pay the authors something in order to include it in a commercial program. With a careful explanation, most of the e-list moderators would probably either permit a posting to their list, or include some sort of mention themselves, as they prefer. Malbisse ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Hastings" To: ; Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 1:53 AM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation > Good idea. Those lists could be just the place. We don't want to look like > we are spaming the lists though. Any thought on how best to approach it? > > Jerry > > At 04:50 PM 1/29/2001 -0500, malbisse wrote: > >Non-published works by scholars is a very interesting idea. Knowing the > >scholarly community, and a bit about the publishing community, it seems very > >likely to be true. > > > >Perhaps if something "official" was worked up in terms of an invitation to > >submit works for formatting for Sword, and then submitted to some of the > >scholarly e-lists such as b-greek, Xtalk, etc. it might open up some very > >interesting avenues. > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 17:04:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:04:46 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Ted Rolle wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Chris Little wrote: > > > > I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > > > without having the unlock key. > > > > Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. > > Yes. I guess integrity would be the only thing stopping someone.... Perhaps, the use of public/private keys would help to prevent this. Lock a module with the users public key. They must therefore use their private key to unlock it. I'd be very wary of giving anyone my private key. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 15:14:32 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:14:32 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010130235548.009fd1b0@mail.dancris.com> References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010130235548.009fd1b0@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <01013116143201.00506@joachim> Hi! > >Something like the MAK commentary which si on crosswire.org? > > > >MAK = "Matthias Ansorgs Kommentar" = "Mathias Ansorg's Commentary" > > > >It's the personal commentary of my brother Matthias :) > > Good thing your brother's name isn't Tom, Dick or Harry. :-) But as I > said, "I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry are." And we now > know who Matthias is. He is your brother. He is not some unknown Tom, Dick, > or Harry. (At least to you.) :-) Ok ok, you think it's not wort it. But his commentary is in German, ond only his and another commentary exist in German, so it's really worth it to have at least two commentaries in German. If english would be my mother tongue i'd really prefer the well known ones. But in German no well knwon commentaries exist for free. > Don't get me wrong. If we get a TDH commentary we should offer it, if it is > good. But a lot of users will want credentials. > > Jerry Joachim -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 17:47:05 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:47:05 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131103714.00abd990@mail.dancris.com> However, if you had a private key under an alias and had covered your tracks in getting such locked modules, what would stop you from giving those modules and key away? It seems to me that all these "locks" are like locks on doors to buildings, which only keep out people that are unwilling to break a window. Jerry At 05:04 PM 1/31/2001 +0000, Trevor Jenkins wrote: >Perhaps, the use of public/private keys would help to prevent >this. Lock a module with the users public key. They must therefore use >their private key to unlock it. I'd be very wary of giving anyone my >private key. > >Regards, Trevor From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 18:20:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:20:36 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <01013116143201.00506@joachim> References: <4.2.0.58.20010130235548.009fd1b0@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010130235548.009fd1b0@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131104929.00abc100@mail.dancris.com> Joachim Ansorg wrote: >Ok ok, you think it's not wort it. I did not say that. And for all I know his commentary may be the best ever done. I am just saying that some people are going to want credentials or a trusted standard. This is more of a problem in English where there are other programs with standard works. In languages where there are no commentaries, for software or even in print, a TDH commentary could be a big hit. Also, I think it would be well worth the effort for anyone to produce their own personal commentary. The process of writing down comments, passage by passage is rewarding. But, if I was getting a commentary for others to use, I would be glad to find someone with better insights than mine to write it. But, that would not stop me from producing my own and distributing it as I saw fit. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 18:52:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:52:36 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131112330.00ab85c0@mail.dancris.com> Joachim Ansorg wrote: >For this solution we need a commercial Bible program, I think all you really need for that is to set up a commercial company that offers the Sword family of programs and modules along with locked modules and keys (or whatever security system works with Sword). You couldn't charge for the program, but you could charge shipping, handling and copying. And most important, you could charge for modules that are not licensed as non-commercial. That means you could charge and collect to cover the cost of royalties. Then you can go to the bible businesses and convince them that they can make enough money with you to be worth their effort and outweigh the risk of a few people making illegal copies. No matter what the security, some people will be able to break it. You need to convince them that there is enough money to be made to cover the unpaid copies. Also, you can farm out all the work. There are services that take orders, make CDs and do all the shipping for you. All you have to do is get the rights from the publishers, pay bills and taxes and take a profit. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 19:26:12 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jesse Jacobsen) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:26:12 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010131103714.00abd990@mail.dancris.com>; from hastings@dancris.com on Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 10:47:05AM -0700 References: <4.2.0.58.20010131103714.00abd990@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <20010131132612.A27173@strider> ... coming out of lurk mode. I've been following this thread, and just thought I'd insert my nickel here. On 01/31/01, Jerry Hastings wrote: > However, if you had a private key under an alias and had covered your > tracks in getting such locked modules, what would stop you from giving > those modules and key away? It seems to me that all these "locks" are like > locks on doors to buildings, which only keep out people that are unwilling > to break a window. That's right, and I think as it should be. Is it realistic to expect Fort Knox? How many people would want to live as the President's family does, in the White House, with armed guards at every corner and Secret Service at every turn? If it were possible to make the encryption and key-exchange process totally secure, then it would be impractical and no fun at all to use locked databases! I don't think total security is possible without a major hassle for users. When I buy a book, I expect to be able to read (use) it totally at my convenience. It's only right to expect the same thing from a locked database, IMO. It may be illegal to photocopy over N pages from a paper book, selling them for profit, but there's nothing in the book's format or distribution scheme that prevents me from doing so with the same kind of security that's being demanded of Sword. On the contrary, there's just a copyright notice, and maybe a warning about the law, and the rest is in the hands of the buyer. If the buyer does not comply with copyright law, the onus for breaking the law is on him, not on the publisher or the distributor of the book. So it seems to me that a public/private key encryption scenario (which provides excellent security, technically), is sufficiently secure from all practical points of view. If the owner of a copyright is not satisfied with it, then perhaps that owner should not allow any electronic distribution, realizing that even paper distribution carries significant risks when there is a thief in the picture. How much should a project like Sword be expected to dabble in the field of law enforcement? There's a limit in there somewhere, and it would make things easier for everyone if it could be well-defined. Just some thoughts, Jesse ... returning to lurk mode. -- Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for. 1024D/2E3EBF13 Jesse Jacobsen (Grace, Madison WI) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 20:08:52 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 06:08:52 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bibleprogram based on Sword References: <4.2.0.58.20010131112330.00ab85c0@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <3A7870D4.D87966B7@bigfoot.com> Jerry Hastings wrote: > > Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > >For this solution we need a commercial Bible program, > ... > Also, you can farm out all the work. There are services that take orders, > make CDs and do all the shipping for you. All you have to do is get the > rights from the publishers, pay bills and taxes and take a profit. ... and the small issue of writing an unlocking system. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 20:13:59 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 06:13:59 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword References: Message-ID: <3A787207.B604EB24@bigfoot.com> Chris Little wrote: > > > ...Generate a key based on a MAC address - if there is no network card > > installed generate the key from the OEM number from the hard drive. In > > either case the legal user of a module couldn't share the key with anyone. > > The key would work only on the machine for which it was generated. We do > > this with our commercial software. > > That seems a bit extreme. Besides, I'm not sure how we would manage > distributing modules with such unique keys. I guess we could use the > MAC/OEM to encode/encrypt the real cipher key. For example, an unlocker > utility sends our server your MAC/OEM, and it replies with a key that must > be decrypted with your MAC/OEM to reveal the real key (which would be the > same for all users). I suspect we'd get a lot of angry users though, when > people started changing their hard drives & NICs. Amen. Hardware tying is a crazy idea for an end-user application program. > Here's a novel idea... maybe there are some commercial Bible software > developers out there who would be interested in adopting an open source > project, merging with us, or just marketing modules in our format. Maybe > Larry Pierce/OLB since we seem to have (somewhat) similar markets and goals? > Maybe OliveTree since our products /don't/ have similar markets (but mostly > because I know they're on the list and have mentioned interest in OS)? Why would any of these people want to do that? I can't see a motive for them other than the open source issue, and they can do that themselves without any help from us. > ... > Maybe Logos/Libronix because I assume there must be some reason Bob > Pritchett is interested in being on the list? So he can gloat about how far ahead of us he is. ;-) Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 16:00:26 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Alexander Garden) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:00:26 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] enabling NIV In-Reply-To: <01013118164900.01453@kanga>; from robynman@dove.net.au on Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 06:16:49PM +1030 References: <01013118164900.01453@kanga> Message-ID: <20010131160026.A1254@toshiba> Greetings, First, get the list of encryption keys from http://www.crosswire.org/sword/ALPHAcckswwlkrfre22034820285912/ Edit /wherever/you/put/sword/modules/mods.d/niv.conf. On my system that's /usr/share/sword/mods.d/niv.conf. Copy the NIV key and place it at the end of the line that looks like: CipherKey= That should do it. Alexander Garden On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 06:16:49PM +1030, Robyn Manning wrote: > Hi all > > I'm waiting for a project to do and meanwhile am checking out the program. I > don't understand how to unencrypt NIV bible. > > Help would be greatly appreciated. > > TIA > > Robyn > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 22:29:50 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:29:50 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <01013114591001.00585@martin> References: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> <01013114591001.00585@martin> Message-ID: <01013123295000.22927@joachim> Hi! > > For this solution we need a commercial Bible program, if it's possible > > for almost all plattforms the same program. > > I do not really understand this. How would the problem be solved by selling > the programs and modules? There is software contains the "commercial" > modules that users can buy, why should sword go the same way? IMHO bible societies want to make profit. If we sell a program (cheap) we could offer them some money for the license. Another point is that the Bibe societies and copyright holders are sceptical to PD-Soft and opensource ware. > > My solution for this would be to put Sword under LGPL, program a good > > Bible study program and sell the program. > > This will involve a lot of work, and the users of the opensource bible > programs like bibletime will not profit from it. Especially those who do > not have the money to buy a program. Hehe! This is a nice point. For sue I'd be working on this program and put lot's of existing code in it (from BibleTime). The program would be cheap to give everybody the chance to have the locked modules unlocked. But maybe there are better solutions. > What about another way to do it? For this aim it would not be necessary to > create and sell a program; it might be sufficient to change towards another > security architecture that can be published opensource; maybe just use > libraries like openssl etc. -- might be necessary anyway for not having to > use the same keys. > This way the encrypted modules would be safe; and users wanting them could > buy the modules while using their common sword frontend. Frontend programs > would not have to be changed. > > > The price should be enough to cover the expenses for module licenses > > etc., but it shouldn't by high. > > Only the commercial modules will be sold, the modules without copyright > > will be free. > > Martin Joachim -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 01:14:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 18:14:36 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Happy New Year Message-ID: <3A4FD9FC.6A2E8654@crosswire.org> May God be the reason we breath this year! Wishing you all a great, renewed joy in serving Him and that the endless depths of His patience and grace with us would remind you every second that you have a God Who cares about your every breath. In Jesus Christ, -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 03:18:52 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (James Gross) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 03:18:52 Subject: [sword-devel] Happy New Year Message-ID:

Amen.

In Christ's Service,

Jim



 


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 06:03:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Leon Brooks) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 14:03:42 +0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters References: Message-ID: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> Chris Little wrote: >> some of our leverage as being a free, non-commercial and OPEN SOURCE >> software package would be taken away. > I don't think being Open Source is much of a selling point to publishers. No, but it does illustrate that in principle we are not chest-hugging greedy and paranoid about things. > Generally, they're afraid of someone cracking the software and > stealing their stuff. There's some logic to it, since someone with an > unlocked module could essentially do anything with that module, like print, > publish online, etc. Amusingly, I'd say we still have much stronger > protection than most closed-source, even commercial products. With SWORD, > you definitely have to have a decrypt key for every query. Logos, on the > other hand, just keeps track of which books you have unlocked and stores it > in a file. In other words, nothing is even encrypted, so you can pretty > easily share your unlock cache file or crack the program itself to ignore > the unlock checks. The advantage here is not ``open source'' but ``better methods,'' or (in this case at least) better engineering. Really, any work done for Christ should be both free and open source regardless, caveat that the workers concerned must find a way to sustain themselves. Many ``Christian'' publishers are worrying too much about staying in business and not enough about what their business really is. While there is a definite duty of care involved, if God be for a publisher, who can be against them? Publishers should have the purity and effectiveness of the works that they produce first in mind, the dollars second (and the spread of the gospel zeroeth: it should not so much be something to be borne in mind as a basic assumption, part of the personality of the company). These days, at least, the only way to make serious money out of authoring something is to write a thick ``Mills-and-Boone'' romance book and sell fifty million of them in the first month. The money is made from the sale of physical books, not the information in them: the information is the reason for the sale, but the book is what actually gets sold; copyright exists to prevent others from making duplicates of the original physical book. The digital realm is a completely different universe, in that duplication costs essentially zero. If I buy a 20GB hard disk for $OZ200.00, my storage is worth $10.00/GB, or 1c/MB. My current collection of SWORD texts cost me about 10c to duplicate; if I'd paid top dollar for the data (it was free), the transport cost would be about $1.50. This compares favourably with about 2000cc (about 3kg) of paper which had to be typeset, printed and bound, then transported, stored, sorted, transported again (repeat maybe twice more), costing about $OZ60.00 at bare-bones prices, probably about double that in reality. Not only that, I can search and cross-reference it all pretty much instantly. Traditional media (ie paper) were protected to some degree from individuals copying them by the difficulty and expense of duplicating the physical medium. This protection is evapourating rapidly. Tapes and videotapes were the leading edge of the wedge, but now with digital storage at unprecedentedly low prices and set to balloon even more, a revolution of profound implications, similar in magnitude to the invention of the printing press, is upon us. [ BTW, is this sounding pontifical enough? :-) ] The different behaviour of the publishing medium requires a different profitability model, a different view of issues like copyright, royalties, and publishing costs. Before printing, money was made in doing the actual transcription; only after presses became common did issues like copyright become significant. Open Source pushes the operating model even further. What concepts will wither and die, and what will blossom in its path? One profitability method is to use electronic media as a leader back to traditional media: ``if you like reading this text on line, have you considered owning an attractively bound printed copy with that traditional feel, clear print, lasting value and batteryless portable operation?'' This, I believe, has a limited future. Either way, the purpose of Christian literature, espcially the Word of God, should be primarily to get itself read and used. If we can find a way to make this happen, hopefully commensurate with the profitability of whatever the publishing companies become, I'm sure God will be pleased. (-: -- Do you remember when you only had to pay for windows when *you* broke them? -- Noel Maddy From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 13:07:00 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (sword-devel@crosswire.org) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 08:07:00 EST Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters Message-ID: Chris, Thank yo so much for telling us how to crack LOGOS. :) Mark From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 17:04:24 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 18:04:24 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters References: Message-ID: <004a01c07414$e7b52430$0101a8c0@gandalf> Interesting... A few weeks ago (14-12-00) I emailed the newsgroep of the online bible (news.onlinebible.org) asking if there was going to be an open source version of the OLB. A kind person pointed me in the right direction: to the SWORD website. A few days later I received a long email from the dutch distributor of the OLB stating he strongly disagreed the SWORD project because (quote) "...their website contains mostly illegal software for distributing copyrighted bible texts..." (quote") "...cannot agree with this anarchistic behaviour..." I think he is mis-understanding the target of the SWORD project: to spread the bible, make it be read by as many people as possible. As far as I can see there is nothing wrong with using the OLB texts, when I have bought the CD-rom. OLB gets paid, I use the sword software to read the bible, everybody happy ??? Like chris said, I think the publishers fear for 'hackers stealing texts' or something. Anyway, is there really anyone who DOES own the bible? Regards, Peter Snoek ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Little" To: "SWORD Devel List" Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 1:10 AM Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters > I got the following from Rick Meyers, who writes e-Sword. > > >> Quote >> > Chris, we should work together to get the various publishers to allow > "their" resources made available for both of "our" products. Hopefully for > free! > > In His service, > > Rick Meyers > rick@e-sword.net > << End Quote << > > He doesn't appear to be that interested in moving to the Sword API from his > own proprietary format, but he's interested in collaborating on the > publisher front. Does this sound wise to the rest of you? If so, Jonathan > (I figure this is your area), could you contact him, fill him in on your > work so far, and see how he can help. > > If we want to extend this further, I believe we could convince the people at > TOLBSS to join us also in asking publishers for permission to freely > distribute texts they own. The up side is that we would get more help > dealing with publishers. The down side is that the publishers may get the > impression that they would be giving too much away by granting this sort of > permission to multiple projects at once. > > Some good news also: I got permission from Larry Nelson for us to distribute > all his works, except those which require royalty payments to others. That > means we can distribute the JPS translation (which has been down for a month > or so, since I found out we didn't have permission to distribute it), the > Rotherham translation (in progress), and the Murdock translation (still > being worked on by him). Larry is also going to contact me with some > information about the Brenton, Lamsa, and Phillips translations, regarding > their necessary royalty payments. We can judge from that information > whether we want to pursue distributing them. The payments may be reasonable > enough to allow us to just pay for them ourselves or we might consider > something like selling unlock codes through PayPal. > > --Chris > > > > > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 19:37:35 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 11:37:35 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Thank yo so much for telling us how to crack LOGOS. :) I told you Logos was crack-able, not HOW to crack it. :) There's much better information on how their security model works, now and in the future, on the bible-linux egroup. It has some good ideas from Bob about varying degrees of security to keep publishers happy. Some of them might not make users completely happy (like web-based modules that you pay for but never really get to download in whole) but may open publishers up to releasing new & important texts that they otherwise wouldn't. There's still no explanation of how to crack Logos there, so don't go there for that reason, but bible-linux is where I got most of my info about Logos' security. -Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 21:56:20 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 13:56:20 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters In-Reply-To: <004a01c07414$e7b52430$0101a8c0@gandalf> Message-ID: > A few weeks ago (14-12-00) I emailed the newsgroep of the online bible > (news.onlinebible.org) asking if there was going to be an open source > version of the OLB. Avoid their newsgroup. OLB has given no support through their bulletin board/newsgroup since they've existed. The users finally got fed up with OLB's official bulletin board and formed their own. The useful (and active) OLB-related forum is: http://pub23.bravenet.com/forum/show.asp?usernum=1920683510 . It's run by TOLBSS, the free OLB module site, unaffiliated with Larry Pierce. > A few days later I received a long email from the dutch distributor > of the OLB stating he strongly disagreed the SWORD project because > > (quote) "...their website contains mostly illegal software for > distributing > copyrighted bible texts..." > (quote") "...cannot agree with this anarchistic behaviour..." Woohoo! That's a lot of FUD. Peter F van der Schelde must be afraid we're going to cut into his profit margin or something. If they're so afraid of our "anarchistic behaviour" I guess I'd better rethink helping them out on any projects in the future. I wouldn't want to taint their project. :) Seriously, though, if anyone knows of any unencrypted, copyrighted modules that are posted, please mention it so that we can encrypt them and contact the owner for permission. He may just have seen the encrypted texts and assumed we were giving them out for free. And I have no idea what he means by "illegal software" when referring to the OLB converter. It's not as if it even required any reverse engineering for Troy to write it. It just reads a RTF file that OLB exports as one of its features. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 1 23:11:03 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (David Burry) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 15:11:03 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters In-Reply-To: <004a01c07414$e7b52430$0101a8c0@gandalf> References: Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20010101150250.021f7c00@beaver> It's only natural that an open source project would attract more hoodlums bent on "anarchistic behaviour" than a closed source one. But one should look to the project leads as to whether the project can categorically be called such, not any blithering idiot (like myself ;o) ) who posts. And one should more carefully examine a web site before jumping to conclusions. Dave P.S. Eudora's giving this message a rating of two red hot chilli peppers ;o) At 06:04 PM 1/1/2001 +0100, Peter Snoek wrote: >A few days later I received a long email from the dutch distributor >of the OLB stating he strongly disagreed the SWORD project because > >(quote) "...their website contains mostly illegal software for distributing >copyrighted bible texts..." >(quote") "...cannot agree with this anarchistic behaviour..." From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 02:33:43 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 18:33:43 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters References: <5.0.0.25.0.20010101150250.021f7c00@beaver> Message-ID: <000b01c07464$a9c0a460$638c2d3f@family> Dear Everyone, So I am guessing that the conclusion of this discussion is?!?... Should I write Rick and let him know we would love to share resources and help each other out, however we find that it is wise that we contact the publishers individually? I love open source projects, you get such good discussions going! -Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 04:47:45 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (David J. Orme) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 23:47:45 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters References: <5.0.0.25.0.20010101150250.021f7c00@beaver> <000b01c07464$a9c0a460$638c2d3f@family> Message-ID: <3A515D71.D507785@coconut-palm-software.com> Jonathan Hughes wrote: > Dear Everyone, > > So I am guessing that the conclusion of this discussion is?!?... Should > I write Rick and let him know we would love to share resources and help each > other out, however we find that it is wise that we contact the publishers > individually? That sounds like the consensus... Dave Orme (Agenda PDA frontend maintainer--no web site for this yet as I'm still in the prototype stage... :) -- The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected. -- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972 From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 16:17:12 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 10:17:12 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Hebrew Bible Copyright contact Message-ID: <000501c074d7$76ee6720$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Most all of the Bible software packages that have the Hebrew Bible use The Westminster Hebrew Morphology text. Gramcord, BibleWindows, BibleWorks, Logos, WordSearch, BART, Bible Companion all use this text. I would be interested in contacting the license holder on behalf of the Sword Project to see if you could use it. But before I did, I wanted to check with the Sword development team to make sure it was OK for me to do so. I also need to know if you would be able to work with the text if permission was granted. Below is a sample of the data format. The format appears pretty straight forward. Just looking at it I see that the fields are as follows, book, chapter, verse, X, the Hebrew word as it appears in the text, the lexical form of the word, and the morphological tag separated by a "@". The X number indicates the order from right to left of the words if combined. For example the first word in the Hebrew Bible is prefixed with the bet preposition, so the preposition takes the 1 slot and the noun takes the 2 slot. It looks like the transliteration scheme is in lower level ASCII, but I have an ASCII table to map the characters to the BWHebb TrueType font. If you wanted to use a different font with a different mapping scheme, I'm sure we could work that out as well. Remember Hebrew goes from right to left, so that will need to be taken into consideration as well when rendering the text so that it will wrap correctly. Let me know what you think. If you think this would be usable by the Sword project, I'll see what I can do about licensing. Sample datafile structure - Genesis 1 >gn1:1 gn1:1,1.1 B.: B.@Pp gn1:1,1.2 R")$I^YT R")$IYT@ncfs gn1:1,2.1 B.FRF^) B.R)_1@vqp3ms gn1:1,3.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:1,4.1 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:1,5.1 HA H@Pa gn1:1,5.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:1,6.1 W: W@Pc gn1:1,6.2 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:1,7.1 HF H@Pa gn1:1,7.2 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs >gn1:2 gn1:2,1.1 W: W@Pc gn1:2,1.2 HF H@Pa gn1:2,1.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:2,2.1 HFY:TF^H HYH@vqp3fs gn1:2,3.1 TO^HW.^ T.OHW.@ncms gn1:2,4.1 WF W@Pc gn1:2,4.2 BO^HW. B.OHW.@ncms gn1:2,5.1 W: W@Pc gn1:2,5.2 XO^$EK: XO$EK:@ncms gn1:2,6.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:2,6.2 P.:N"^Y P.FNEH@ncbpc gn1:2,7.1 T:HO^WM T.:HOWM@ncbs gn1:2,8.1 W: W@Pc gn1:2,8.2 R^W.XA RW.XA@ncbs gn1:2,9.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:2,10.1 M:RAXE^PET RXP@vpPfs gn1:2,11.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:2,11.2 P.:N"^Y P.FNEH@ncbpc gn1:2,12.1 HA H@Pa gn1:2,12.2 M.F^YIM MAYIM@ncmp >gn1:3 gn1:3,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:3,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:3,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:3,3.1 Y:HI^Y HYH@vqi3msXa{1}Jt gn1:3,4.1 )O^WR )OWR@ncbs gn1:3,5.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:3,5.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:3,5.3 )O^WR )OWR@ncbs >gn1:4 gn1:4,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:4,1.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:4,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:4,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:4,3.2 HF H@Pa gn1:4,3.3 )O^WR )OWR@ncbs gn1:4,4.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:4,4.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams gn1:4,5.1 WA W@Pc gn1:4,5.2 Y.AB:D."^L B.DL@vhw3msXa gn1:4,6.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:4,7.1 B."^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:4,8.1 HF H@Pa gn1:4,8.2 )O^WR )OWR@ncbs gn1:4,9.1 W. W@Pc gn1:4,9.2 B"^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:4,10.1 HA H@Pa gn1:4,10.2 XO^$EK: XO$EK:@ncms >gn1:5 gn1:5,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:5,1.2 Y.IQ:RF^) QR)_1@vqw3ms gn1:5,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:5,3.1 LF L@Pp+Pa gn1:5,3.2 )OWR^ )OWR@ncbs gn1:5,4.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:5,5.1 W: W@Pc gn1:5,5.2 LA L@Pp+Pa gn1:5,5.3 XO^$EK: XO$EK:@ncms gn1:5,6.1 QF^RF) QR)_1@vqp3ms gn1:5,7.1 LF^Y:LFH LAY:LFH@ncms gn1:5,8.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:5,8.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:5,8.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:5,9.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:5,9.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:5,9.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:5,10.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:5,11.1 )EXF^D )EXFD@ams gn1:5,12.1 P P@x >gn1:6 gn1:6,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:6,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:6,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:6,3.1 Y:HI^Y HYH@vqi3msXa{1}Jt gn1:6,4.1 RFQI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncms gn1:6,5.1 B.: B.@Pp gn1:6,5.2 TO^WK: T.FWEK:@ncmsc gn1:6,6.1 HA H@Pa gn1:6,6.2 M.F^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:6,7.1 WI W@Pc gn1:6,7.2 YHI^Y HYH@vqi3msXa{1}Jt gn1:6,8.1 MAB:D.I^YL B.DL@vhPms gn1:6,9.1 B."^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:6,10.1 MA^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:6,11.1 LF L@Pp gn1:6,11.2 MF^YIM MAYIM@ncmp >gn1:7 gn1:7,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:7,1.2 Y.A^(A& (&H_1@vqw3msXa gn1:7,2.1 ):ELOHIYM^ ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:7,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:7,3.2 HF H@Pa gn1:7,3.3 RFQIY(A^ RFQIY(A@ncms gn1:7,4.1 WA W@Pc gn1:7,4.2 Y.AB:D."^L B.DL@vhw3msXa gn1:7,5.1 B."^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:7,6.1 HA H@Pa gn1:7,6.2 M.A^YIM^ MAYIM@ncmp gn1:7,7.1 ):A$ER^ ):A$ER@Pr gn1:7,8.1 MI MIN@Pp gn1:7,8.2 T.A^XAT T.AXAT_1@Pp gn1:7,9.1 LF L@Pp+Pa gn1:7,9.2 RFQI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncms gn1:7,10.1 W. W@Pc gn1:7,10.2 B"^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:7,11.1 HA H@Pa gn1:7,11.2 M.A^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:7,12.1 ):A$E^R ):A$ER@Pr gn1:7,13.1 M" MIN@Pp gn1:7,13.2 (A^L (AL_2@Pp gn1:7,14.1 LF L@Pp+Pa gn1:7,14.2 RFQI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncms gn1:7,15.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:7,15.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:7,15.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:8 gn1:8,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:8,1.2 Y.IQ:RF^) QR)_1@vqw3ms gn1:8,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:8,3.1 LF^ L@Pp+Pa gn1:8,3.2 RFQI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncms gn1:8,4.1 $FMF^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:8,5.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:8,5.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:8,5.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:8,6.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:8,6.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:8,6.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:8,7.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:8,8.1 $"NI^Y $"NIY@ams gn1:8,9.1 P P@x >gn1:9 gn1:9,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:9,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:9,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:9,3.1 YIQ.FW^W. QWH_2@vni3mp{1}Jm gn1:9,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:9,4.2 M.A^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:9,5.1 MI MIN@Pp gn1:9,5.2 T.A^XAT T.AXAT_1@Pp gn1:9,6.1 HA H@Pa gn1:9,6.2 $.FMA^YIM^ $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:9,7.1 )EL- )EL@Pp gn1:9,7.2 MFQO^WM MFQOWM@ncms gn1:9,8.1 )EXF^D )EXFD@ams gn1:9,9.1 W: W@Pc gn1:9,9.2 T"RF)E^H R)H@vni3fs{1}Jm gn1:9,10.1 HA H@Pa gn1:9,10.2 Y.AB.F$F^H YAB.F$FH@ncfs gn1:9,11.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:9,11.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:9,11.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:10 gn1:10,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:10,1.2 Y.IQ:RF^) QR)_1@vqw3ms gn1:10,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:10,3.1 LA L@Pp+Pa gn1:10,3.2 Y.AB.F$FH^ YAB.F$FH@ncfs gn1:10,4.1 )E^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:10,5.1 W. W@Pc gn1:10,5.2 L: L@Pp gn1:10,5.3 MIQ:W"^H MIQ:WEH_2@ncmsc gn1:10,6.1 HA H@Pa gn1:10,6.2 M.A^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:10,7.1 QFRF^) QR)_1@vqp3ms gn1:10,8.1 YAM.I^YM YFM@ncmp gn1:10,9.1 WA W@Pc gn1:10,9.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:10,10.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:10,11.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:10,11.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams >gn1:11 gn1:11,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:11,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:11,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:11,3.1 T.A^D:$"^) D.$)@vhi3fsXa{1}Jt gn1:11,4.1 HF H@Pa gn1:11,4.2 )F^REC^ )EREC@ncbs gn1:11,5.1 D.E^$E) D.E$E)@ncms gn1:11,6.1 ^("&EB ("&EB@ncms gn1:11,7.1 MAZ:RI^Y(A ZR(@vhPms gn1:11,8.1 ZE^RA( ZERA(@ncms gn1:11,9.1 ("^C ("C@ncmsc gn1:11,10.1 P.:RI^Y P.:RIY@ncms gn1:11,11.1 (O^&EH (&H_1@vqPms gn1:11,12.1 P.:RIY^ P.:RIY@ncms gn1:11,13.1 L: L@Pp gn1:11,13.2 MIYN/O^W MIYN@ncmscX3ms gn1:11,14.1 ):A$E^R ):A$ER@Pr gn1:11,15.1 ZAR:(/OW- ZERA(@ncmscX3ms gn1:11,15.2 B/O^W B.@PpX3ms gn1:11,16.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:11,16.2 HF H@Pa gn1:11,16.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:11,17.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:11,17.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:11,17.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:12 gn1:12,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:12,1.2 T.OWC"^) YC)@vhw3fsXa gn1:12,2.1 HF H@Pa gn1:12,2.2 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:12,3.1 ^D.E$E) D.E$E)@ncms gn1:12,4.1 ("^&EB ("&EB@ncms gn1:12,5.1 MAZ:RI^Y(A ZR(@vhPms gn1:12,6.1 ZE^RA(^ ZERA(@ncms gn1:12,7.1 L: L@Pp gn1:12,7.2 MIYN/"^HW. MIYN@ncmscX3ms gn1:12,8.1 W: W@Pc gn1:12,8.2 ("^C ("C@ncms gn1:12,9.1]3 (O^&EH- (&H_1@vqPms gn1:12,9.2]3 P.:RI^Y P.:RIY@ncms gn1:12,10.1 ):A$E^R ):A$ER@Pr gn1:12,11.1 ZAR:(/OW- ZERA(@ncmscX3ms gn1:12,11.2 B/O^W B.@PpX3ms gn1:12,12.1 L: L@Pp gn1:12,12.2 MIYN/"^HW. MIYN@ncmscX3ms gn1:12,13.1 WA W@Pc gn1:12,13.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:12,14.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:12,15.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:12,15.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams >gn1:13 gn1:13,1.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:13,1.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:13,1.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:13,2.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:13,2.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:13,2.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:13,3.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:13,4.1 $:LIY$I^Y $:LIY$IY@ams gn1:13,5.1 P P@x >gn1:14 gn1:14,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:14,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:14,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:14,3.1 Y:HI^Y HYH@vqi3msXa{1}Jt gn1:14,4.1 M:)OROT^ MF)OWR@ncmp gn1:14,5.1 B.I B.@Pp gn1:14,5.2 R:QI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncmsc gn1:14,6.1 HA H@Pa gn1:14,6.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:14,7.1 L: L@Pp gn1:14,7.2 HAB:D.I^YL B.DL@vhc gn1:14,8.1 B."^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:14,9.1 HA H@Pa gn1:14,9.2 Y.O^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:14,10.1 W. W@Pc gn1:14,10.2 B"^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:14,11.1 HA H@Pa gn1:14,11.2 L.F^Y:LFH LAY:LFH@ncms gn1:14,12.1 W: W@Pc gn1:14,12.2 HFY^W. HYH@vqp3cp{2} gn1:14,13.1 L: L@Pp gn1:14,13.2 )OTOT^ )OWT@ncbp gn1:14,14.1 W. W@Pc gn1:14,14.2 L: L@Pp gn1:14,14.3 MO^W(:ADI^YM MOW("D@ncmp gn1:14,15.1 W. W@Pc gn1:14,15.2 L: L@Pp gn1:14,15.3 YFMI^YM YOWM@ncmp gn1:14,16.1 W: W@Pc gn1:14,16.2 $FNI^YM $FNFH@ncfp >gn1:15 gn1:15,1.1 W: W@Pc gn1:15,1.2 HFY^W. HYH@vqp3cp{2} gn1:15,2.1 LI L@Pp gn1:15,2.2 M:)OWROT^ MF)OWR@ncmp gn1:15,3.1 B.I B.@Pp gn1:15,3.2 R:QI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncmsc gn1:15,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:15,4.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:15,5.1 L: L@Pp gn1:15,5.2 HF)I^YR )WR@vhc gn1:15,6.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:15,6.2 HF H@Pa gn1:15,6.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:15,7.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:15,7.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:15,7.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:16 gn1:16,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:16,1.2 Y.A^(A& (&H_1@vqw3msXa gn1:16,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:16,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:16,3.2 $:N"^Y $:NAYIM@amdc gn1:16,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,4.2 M.:)ORO^T MF)OWR@ncmp gn1:16,5.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,5.2 G.:DOLI^YM G.FDOWL@amp gn1:16,6.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:16,6.2 HA H@Pa gn1:16,6.3 M.F)O^WR MF)OWR@ncms gn1:16,7.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,7.2 G.FDOL^ G.FDOWL@ams gn1:16,8.1 L: L@Pp gn1:16,8.2 MEM:$E^LET MEM:$FLFH@ncfsc gn1:16,9.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,9.2 Y.O^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:16,10.1 W: W@Pc gn1:16,10.2 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:16,10.3 HA H@Pa gn1:16,10.4 M.F)O^WR MF)OWR@ncms gn1:16,11.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,11.2 Q.F+ON^ QF+ON@ams gn1:16,12.1 L: L@Pp gn1:16,12.2 MEM:$E^LET MEM:$FLFH@ncfsc gn1:16,13.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,13.2 L.A^Y:LFH LAY:LFH@ncms gn1:16,14.1 W: W@Pc gn1:16,14.2 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:16,15.1 HA H@Pa gn1:16,15.2 K.OWKFBI^YM K.OWKFB@ncmp >gn1:17 gn1:17,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:17,1.2 Y.IT."^N NTN@vqw3ms gn1:17,2.1 )OT/F^M )"T@PoX3mp gn1:17,3.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:17,4.1 B.I B.@Pp gn1:17,4.2 R:QI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncmsc gn1:17,5.1 HA H@Pa gn1:17,5.2 $.FMF^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:17,6.1 L: L@Pp gn1:17,6.2 HF)I^YR )WR@vhc gn1:17,7.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:17,7.2 HF H@Pa gn1:17,7.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs >gn1:18 gn1:18,1.1 W: W@Pc gn1:18,1.2 LI L@Pp gn1:18,1.3 M:$OL^ M$L_2@vqc gn1:18,2.1 B.A B.@Pp+Pa gn1:18,2.2 Y.O^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:18,3.1 W. W@Pc gn1:18,3.2 BA B.@Pp+Pa gn1:18,3.3 L.A^Y:LFH LAY:LFH@ncms gn1:18,4.1 W.^ W@Pc gn1:18,4.2 L:A L@Pp gn1:18,4.3 HAB:D.I^YL B.DL@vhc gn1:18,5.1 B."^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:18,6.1 HF H@Pa gn1:18,6.2 )O^WR )OWR@ncbs gn1:18,7.1 W. W@Pc gn1:18,7.2 B"^YN B.AYIN@Pp gn1:18,8.1 HA H@Pa gn1:18,8.2 XO^$EK: XO$EK:@ncms gn1:18,9.1 WA W@Pc gn1:18,9.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:18,10.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:18,11.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:18,11.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams >gn1:19 gn1:19,1.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:19,1.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:19,1.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:19,2.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:19,2.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:19,2.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:19,3.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:19,4.1 R:BIY(I^Y R:BIY(IY@ams gn1:19,5.1 P P@x >gn1:20 gn1:20,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:20,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:20,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:20,3.1 YI$:R:C^W. $RC@vqi3mp{1}Jm gn1:20,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:20,4.2 M.A^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:20,5.1 $E^REC $EREC@ncms gn1:20,6.1 NE^PE$ NEPE$@ncfs gn1:20,7.1 XAY.F^H XAY_1@afs gn1:20,8.1 W: W@Pc gn1:20,8.2 (OWP^ (OWP@ncms gn1:20,9.1 Y:(OWP"^P (WP_1@vei3ms{1}Jm gn1:20,10.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:20,10.2 HF H@Pa gn1:20,10.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:20,11.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:20,11.2 P.:N"^Y P.FNEH@ncbpc gn1:20,12.1 R:QI^Y(A RFQIY(A@ncmsc gn1:20,13.1 HA H@Pa gn1:20,13.2 $.FMF^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp >gn1:21 gn1:21,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:21,1.2 Y.IB:RF^) B.R)_1@vqw3ms gn1:21,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:21,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:21,3.2 HA H@Pa gn1:21,3.3 T.AN.IYNI^M T.AN.IYN@ncmp gn1:21,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:21,4.2 G.:DOLI^YM G.FDOWL@amp gn1:21,5.1 W: W@Pc gn1:21,5.2 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:21,6.1 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:21,6.2 NE^PE$ NEPE$@ncfs gn1:21,7.1 HA^ H@Pa gn1:21,7.2 XAY.F^H XAY_1@afs gn1:21,8.1 HF^ H@Pa gn1:21,8.2 ROME^&ET RM&@vqPfs gn1:21,9.1 ):A$ER^ ):A$ER@Pr gn1:21,10.1 $FR:C^W. $RC@vqp3cp gn1:21,11.1 HA H@Pa gn1:21,11.2 M.A^YIM MAYIM@ncmp gn1:21,12.1 L: L@Pp gn1:21,12.2 MI^YN/"HE^M MIYN@ncmpcX3mp gn1:21,13.1 W: W@Pc gn1:21,13.2 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:21,14.1 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:21,14.2 (O^WP (OWP@ncms gn1:21,15.1 K.FNFP^ K.FNFP@ncfs gn1:21,16.1 L: L@Pp gn1:21,16.2 MIYN/"^HW. MIYN@ncmscX3ms gn1:21,17.1 WA W@Pc gn1:21,17.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:21,18.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:21,19.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:21,19.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams >gn1:22 gn1:22,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:22,1.2 Y:BF^REK: B.RK:_2@vpw3ms gn1:22,2.1 )OT/F^M )"T@PoX3mp gn1:22,3.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:22,4.1 L" L@Pp gn1:22,4.2 )MO^R )MR_1@vqc gn1:22,5.1 P.:R^W. P.RH@vqvmp gn1:22,6.1 W. W@Pc gn1:22,6.2 R:B^W. RBH_1@vqvmp gn1:22,7.1 W. W@Pc gn1:22,7.2 MIL:)^W. ML)@vqvmp gn1:22,8.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:22,8.2 HA H@Pa gn1:22,8.3 M.A^YIM^ MAYIM@ncmp gn1:22,9.1 B.A B.@Pp+Pa gn1:22,9.2 Y.AM.I^YM YFM@ncmp gn1:22,10.1 W: W@Pc gn1:22,10.2 HF H@Pa gn1:22,10.3 (O^WP (OWP@ncms gn1:22,11.1 YI^REB RBH_1@vqi3msXa{1}Jt gn1:22,12.1 B.F B.@Pp+Pa gn1:22,12.2 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs >gn1:23 gn1:23,1.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:23,1.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:23,1.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:23,2.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:23,2.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:23,2.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:23,3.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:23,4.1 X:AMIY$I^Y X:AMIY$IY@ams gn1:23,5.1 P P@x >gn1:24 gn1:24,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:24,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:24,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:24,3.1 T.OWC"^) YC)@vhi3fsXa{1}Jt gn1:24,4.1 HF H@Pa gn1:24,4.2 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:24,5.1 NE^PE$ NEPE$@ncfs gn1:24,6.1 XAY.FH^ XAY_1@afs gn1:24,7.1 L: L@Pp gn1:24,7.2 MIYN/F^H. MIYN@ncmscX3fs gn1:24,8.1 B.:H"MF^H B.:H"MFH@ncfs gn1:24,9.1 WF W@Pc gn1:24,9.2 RE^ME& REME&@ncms gn1:24,10.1 W: W@Pc gn1:24,10.2 XA^Y:TOW- XAY.FH_1@ncfsc gn1:24,10.3 )E^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:24,11.1 L: L@Pp gn1:24,11.2 MIYN/F^H. MIYN@ncmscX3fs gn1:24,12.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:24,12.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:24,12.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:25 gn1:25,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:25,1.2 Y.A^(A& (&H_1@vqw3msXa gn1:25,2.1 ):ELOHIYM^ ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:25,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:25,3.2 XAY.A^T XAY.FH_1@ncfsc gn1:25,4.1 HF H@Pa gn1:25,4.2 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:25,5.1 L: L@Pp gn1:25,5.2 MIYN/F^H. MIYN@ncmscX3fs gn1:25,6.1 W: W@Pc gn1:25,6.2 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:25,6.3 HA H@Pa gn1:25,6.4 B.:H"MFH^ B.:H"MFH@ncfs gn1:25,7.1 L: L@Pp gn1:25,7.2 MIYN/F^H. MIYN@ncmscX3fs gn1:25,8.1 W: W@Pc gn1:25,8.2 )"^T )"T@Po gn1:25,9.1 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:25,9.2 RE^ME& REME&@ncms gn1:25,10.1 HF^ H@Pa gn1:25,10.2 ):ADFMF^H ):ADFMFH_1@ncfs gn1:25,11.1 L: L@Pp gn1:25,11.2 MIYN/"^HW. MIYN@ncmscX3ms gn1:25,12.1 WA W@Pc gn1:25,12.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:25,13.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:25,14.1 K.IY- K.IY_2@Pp gn1:25,14.2 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams >gn1:26 gn1:26,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:26,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:26,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:26,3.1 NA^(:A&E^H (&H_1@vqi1cp{1}Cm gn1:26,4.1 )FDF^M )FDFM_1@ncms gn1:26,5.1 B.: B.@Pp gn1:26,5.2 CAL:M/"^NW. CELEM_1@ncmscX1cp gn1:26,6.1 K.I K.@Pp gn1:26,6.2 D:MW.T/"^NW. D.:MW.T@ncfscX1cp gn1:26,7.1 W: W@Pc gn1:26,7.2 YIR:D.W.^ RDH_1@vqi3mp{1}Jm gn1:26,8.1 BI B.@Pp gn1:26,8.2 D:GA^T D.FGFH@ncfsc gn1:26,9.1 HA H@Pa gn1:26,9.2 Y.F^M YFM@ncms gn1:26,10.1 W. W@Pc gn1:26,10.2 B: B.@Pp gn1:26,10.3 (O^WP (OWP@ncms gn1:26,11.1 HA H@Pa gn1:26,11.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:26,12.1 W. W@Pc gn1:26,12.2 BA B.@Pp+Pa gn1:26,12.3 B.:H"MFH^ B.:H"MFH@ncfs gn1:26,13.1 W. W@Pc gn1:26,13.2 B: B.@Pp gn1:26,13.3 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:26,13.4 HF H@Pa gn1:26,13.5 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:26,14.1 W. W@Pc gn1:26,14.2 B: B.@Pp gn1:26,14.3 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:26,14.4 HF H@Pa gn1:26,14.5 RE^ME& REME&@ncms gn1:26,15.1 HF^ H@Pa gn1:26,15.2 ROM"^& RM&@vqPms gn1:26,16.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:26,16.2 HF H@Pa gn1:26,16.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs >gn1:27 gn1:27,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:27,1.2 Y.IB:RF^) B.R)_1@vqw3ms gn1:27,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:27,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:27,3.2 HF^ H@Pa gn1:27,3.3 )FDFM^ )FDFM_1@ncms gn1:27,4.1 B.: B.@Pp gn1:27,4.2 CAL:M/O^W CELEM_1@ncmscX3ms gn1:27,5.1 B.: B.@Pp gn1:27,5.2 CE^LEM CELEM_1@ncms gn1:27,6.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:27,7.1 B.FRF^) B.R)_1@vqp3ms gn1:27,8.1 )OT/O^W )"T@PoX3ms gn1:27,9.1 ZFKF^R ZFKFR@ncms gn1:27,10.1 W. W@Pc gn1:27,10.2 N:Q"BF^H N:Q"BFH@ncfs gn1:27,11.1 B.FRF^) B.R)_1@vqp3ms gn1:27,12.1 )OT/F^M )"T@PoX3mp >gn1:28 gn1:28,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:28,1.2 Y:BF^REK: B.RK:_2@vpw3ms gn1:28,2.1 )OT/FM^ )"T@PoX3mp gn1:28,3.1 ):ELOHIYM^ ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:28,4.1 WA W@Pc gn1:28,4.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:28,5.1 L/FHE^M L@PpX3mp gn1:28,6.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:28,7.1 P.:R^W. P.RH@vqvmp gn1:28,8.1 W. W@Pc gn1:28,8.2 R:B^W. RBH_1@vqvmp gn1:28,9.1 W. W@Pc gn1:28,9.2 MIL:)^W. ML)@vqvmp gn1:28,10.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:28,10.2 HF H@Pa gn1:28,10.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:28,11.1 W: W@Pc gn1:28,11.2 KIB:$U^/HF K.B$@vqvmpX3fs gn1:28,12.1 W. W@Pc gn1:28,12.2 R:D^W. RDH_1@vqvmp gn1:28,13.1 B.I B.@Pp gn1:28,13.2 D:GA^T D.FGFH@ncfsc gn1:28,14.1 HA H@Pa gn1:28,14.2 Y.FM^ YFM@ncms gn1:28,15.1 W. W@Pc gn1:28,15.2 B: B.@Pp gn1:28,15.3 (O^WP (OWP@ncms gn1:28,16.1 HA H@Pa gn1:28,16.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:28,17.1 W. W@Pc gn1:28,17.2 B: B.@Pp gn1:28,17.3 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:28,17.4 XAY.F^H XAY.FH_1@ncfs gn1:28,18.1 HF^ H@Pa gn1:28,18.2 ROME^&ET RM&@vqPfs gn1:28,19.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:28,19.2 HF H@Pa gn1:28,19.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs >gn1:29 gn1:29,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:29,1.2 Y.O^)MER )MR_1@vqw3ms gn1:29,2.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:29,3.1 HIN."H^ HIN."H@Pi gn1:29,4.1 NFTA^T.IY NTN@vqp1cs gn1:29,5.1 L/FKE^M L@PpX2mp gn1:29,6.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:29,6.2 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:29,6.3 ("^&EB ("&EB@ncms gn1:29,7.1 ZOR"^(A ZR(@vqPms gn1:29,8.1 ZE^RA( ZERA(@ncms gn1:29,9.1 ):A$ER^ ):A$ER@Pr gn1:29,10.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:29,10.2 P.:N"^Y P.FNEH@ncbpc gn1:29,11.1 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:29,11.2 HF H@Pa gn1:29,11.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:29,12.1 W: W@Pc gn1:29,12.2 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:29,12.3 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:29,12.4 HF H@Pa gn1:29,12.5 ("^C ("C@ncms gn1:29,13.1 ):A$ER- ):A$ER@Pr gn1:29,13.2 B./O^W B.@PpX3ms gn1:29,14.1 P:RIY- P.:RIY@ncms gn1:29,14.2 ("^C ("C@ncms gn1:29,15.1 ZOR"^(A ZR(@vqPms gn1:29,16.1 ZF^RA( ZERA(@ncms gn1:29,17.1 L/FKE^M L@PpX2mp gn1:29,18.1 YI^H:YE^H HYH@vqi3ms gn1:29,19.1 L: L@Pp gn1:29,19.2 )FK:LF^H )FK:LFH@ncfs >gn1:30 gn1:30,1.1 W.^ W@Pc gn1:30,1.2 L: L@Pp gn1:30,1.3 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:30,1.4 XAY.A^T XAY_1@ncfsc gn1:30,2.1 ^HF H@Pa gn1:30,2.2 )FREC )EREC@ncbs gn1:30,3.1 W. W@Pc gn1:30,3.2 L: L@Pp gn1:30,3.3 KFL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:30,3.4 (O^WP (OWP@ncms gn1:30,4.1 HA H@Pa gn1:30,4.2 $.FMA^YIM $FMAYIM@ncmp gn1:30,5.1 W. W@Pc gn1:30,5.2 L: L@Pp gn1:30,5.3 KO^L K.OL@ncms gn1:30,6.1 ROWM"^& RM&@vqPms gn1:30,7.1 (AL- (AL_2@Pp gn1:30,7.2 HF H@Pa gn1:30,7.3 )F^REC )EREC@ncbs gn1:30,8.1 ):A$ER- ):A$ER@Pr gn1:30,8.2 B./OW^ B.@PpX3ms gn1:30,9.1 NE^PE$ NEPE$@ncfs gn1:30,10.1 XAY.F^H XAY_1@afs gn1:30,11.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:30,11.2 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:30,11.3 YE^REQ YEREQ@ncms gn1:30,12.1 ("^&EB ("&EB@ncms gn1:30,13.1 L: L@Pp gn1:30,13.2 )FK:LF^H )FK:LFH@ncfs gn1:30,14.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:30,14.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:30,14.3 K"^N K."N_2@Pd >gn1:31 gn1:31,1.1 WA W@Pc gn1:31,1.2 Y.A^R:) R)H@vqw3msXa gn1:31,2.1 ):ELOHIYM^ ):ELOHIYM@ncmp gn1:31,3.1 )ET- )"T@Po gn1:31,3.2 K.FL- K.OL@ncmsc gn1:31,3.3 ):A$E^R ):A$ER@Pr gn1:31,4.1 (F&F^H (&H_1@vqp3ms gn1:31,5.1 W: W@Pc gn1:31,5.2 HIN."H- HIN."H@Pi gn1:31,5.3 +O^WB +OWB_1@ams gn1:31,6.1 M:)O^D M:)OD@Pd gn1:31,7.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:31,7.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:31,7.3 (E^REB (EREB_1@ncms gn1:31,8.1 WA^ W@Pc gn1:31,8.2 Y:HIY- HYH@vqw3msXa gn1:31,8.3 BO^QER B.OQER_2@ncms gn1:31,9.1 YO^WM YOWM@ncms gn1:31,10.1 HA H@Pa gn1:31,10.2 $.I$.I^Y $I$.IY@ams gn1:31,11.1 P P@x Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 16:17:09 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 10:17:09 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Project "eL" Message-ID: <000401c074d7$75293780$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> I thought you guys might be interested in taking a look at this: http://www.leningradensis.org/ The goal of the XML Leningrad Codex markup project is to produce a fresh, from scratch "mirror image" of the Leningrad Codex of the Hebrew Bible, encoded at the character/glyph level in UNICODE, which will be suitable for use in "XML-aware" applications (word processors, database engines, web-applications). Such an encoded text can be used for an infinite variety of purposes and will allow for collaborative projects via the Internet to "pyramid" knowledge, encourage the "reuse" of basic data and analysis, extend the value of limited human and financial resources, and reduce duplication of effort. Project "eL" has several innovative and unique aspects: it will be an Open Source project it will invite the participation of the general public it will endeavor to markup the entire manuscript it will produce a freely available UNICODE Hebrew font By "open source" we mean that the resulting text, although copyrighted and with an institutional custodian, will be freely distributable for any purpose. Project "eL" is also a sociological experiment, testing an adaptation of a model for human collaboration in the production of knowledge which has been successful in the software development community (e.g., GNU/Linux) and natural sciences (e.g., SETI@home). We believe that "eL" will encourage the use and study of the Hebrew Bible across the world via the Internet, and that other disciplines will be able to profit from our experience. Once the project completes its first phase, the result will be a complete Hebrew Bible usable by Sword. I figured this might be good news to you guys. Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 16:20:28 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 10:20:28 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Diatheke Message-ID: <000601c074d7$eb585800$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> I sent this to the list a couple weeks ago, but it never went through. Here it is again: _________________________________ I think I'm getting close. I'm trying to install diatheke on my server. The server is running Red Hat Linux and I telnet in. I've been using Linux for about a week or so, so my experience level is rather low. I have figured out how to do basic commands. The commands are not much different from DOS and so I'm relatively comfortable since I started computing before Windows. Anyway, this is how far I've gotten so far... I placed all of sword-1.5.tar.gz into a directory /sword and placed everything from kjv.zip into /html/sword I copied the contents of /html/kjv/kjv.conf into /sword/mods.onf and changed the paths like this: [Globals] AutoInstall=./html/sword/ [KJV] DataPath=./html/sword/kjv/ Then I ran make. It must have worked because my screen filled with gibberish and a 10.5 MB file was created in the /sword/lib directory. The file is named libsword.a I then put everything from diatheke2.0.zip into my /cgi-bin/ directory. I had to run make a few times to get it to work. I had to edit the first line of makefileto root := /home/sites/site84/sword It took me a while to figure out this is where my stuff is on the server. When I made this change, make worked and it created two files called diatheke.o and diatheke.d I then moved both of these files to /cgi-bin/ I changed the permissions on diatheke.pl to be able to execute but when I do ./diatheke.pl it says "no such file or directory" I'm running it from within my /cgi-bin/ when I try to access it from the browser http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl I get "Internal Server Error" If anyone has read down this far, can you see any obvious thing I'm doing wrong. Like I said, I'm new to Linux and perl and so I'm not real sure what all I'm doing, but I did get this far. That ought to count for something. :-) Any help would be apreciated. Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 17:10:49 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 18:10:49 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters References: <4.3.1.2.20010102023824.00ca8100@pop.indo.net.id> Message-ID: <003201c074de$f884fa40$0101a8c0@gandalf> Dear Marc, you're not troubling me... I am just new here. You can access the OLB message board the following way: assuming you use outlook express as news reader: 1. menu extra | accounts | news 2. add an item. (fill in username, email adress and news server: NEWS.ONLINEBIBLE.ORG) 3. a new item appears in your folder list. Click on it (news.onlinebible.org) 4. you can click a button to synchronize (download messages). Hope this helps. By the way - the OLB newsgroup is not really friendly towards the SWORD project. Although I was pointed to the sword projects by a friendly member, I also received unfriendly emails about SWORD. So be warned... Kind regards, Peter Snoek ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc" To: "Peter Snoek" Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 8:40 PM Subject: (was Re: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters) > Dear Peter Snoek, > Sorry to trouble you. > I just read the below: including a comment about (news.onlinebible.org). > > Could you tell me how/where to join the Online Bible mailing list/newsgroup?? > > I would like to be able to get their stuff as well. > Thanks, > ..Marc > > At 06:04 PM 1/1/01 +0100, you wrote: > >Interesting... > > > >A few weeks ago (14-12-00) I emailed the newsgroep of the online bible > >(news.onlinebible.org) asking if there was going to be an open source > >version of the OLB. A kind person pointed me in the right direction: to the > >SWORD website. > > > >A few days later I received a long email from the dutch distributor > >of the OLB stating he strongly disagreed the SWORD project because > > > >(quote) "...their website contains mostly illegal software for distributing > >copyrighted bible texts..." > >(quote") "...cannot agree with this anarchistic behaviour..." > > > >I think he is mis-understanding the target of the SWORD project: to spread > >the bible, make it be read by as many people as possible. > >As far as I can see there is nothing wrong with using the OLB texts, when I > >have bought the CD-rom. OLB gets paid, I use the sword software to read the > >bible, everybody happy ??? > > > >Like chris said, I think the publishers fear for 'hackers stealing texts' or > >something. > >Anyway, is there really anyone who DOES own the bible? > > > >Regards, > > > >Peter Snoek > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Chris Little" > >To: "SWORD Devel List" > >Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 1:10 AM > >Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters > > > > > > > I got the following from Rick Meyers, who writes e-Sword. > > > > > > >> Quote >> > > > Chris, we should work together to get the various publishers to allow > > > "their" resources made available for both of "our" products. Hopefully > >for > > > free! > > > > > > In His service, > > > > > > Rick Meyers > > > rick@e-sword.net > > > << End Quote << > > > > > > He doesn't appear to be that interested in moving to the Sword API from > >his > > > own proprietary format, but he's interested in collaborating on the > > > publisher front. Does this sound wise to the rest of you? If so, > >Jonathan > > > (I figure this is your area), could you contact him, fill him in on your > > > work so far, and see how he can help. > > > > > > If we want to extend this further, I believe we could convince the people > >at > > > TOLBSS to join us also in asking publishers for permission to freely > > > distribute texts they own. The up side is that we would get more help > > > dealing with publishers. The down side is that the publishers may get the > > > impression that they would be giving too much away by granting this sort > >of > > > permission to multiple projects at once. > > > > > > Some good news also: I got permission from Larry Nelson for us to > >distribute > > > all his works, except those which require royalty payments to others. > >That > > > means we can distribute the JPS translation (which has been down for a > >month > > > or so, since I found out we didn't have permission to distribute it), the > > > Rotherham translation (in progress), and the Murdock translation (still > > > being worked on by him). Larry is also going to contact me with some > > > information about the Brenton, Lamsa, and Phillips translations, regarding > > > their necessary royalty payments. We can judge from that information > > > whether we want to pursue distributing them. The payments may be > >reasonable > > > enough to allow us to just pay for them ourselves or we might consider > > > something like selling unlock codes through PayPal. > > > > > > --Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 19:32:43 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 11:32:43 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Hebrew Bible Copyright contact In-Reply-To: <000501c074d7$76ee6720$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: > Most all of the Bible software packages that have the Hebrew Bible use > The Westminster Hebrew Morphology text. Gramcord, BibleWindows, > BibleWorks, > Logos, WordSearch, BART, Bible Companion all use this text. I would be > interested in contacting the license holder on behalf of the Sword Project > to see if you could use it. This sounds great, if we can get permission. > It looks like the transliteration scheme is in lower level ASCII, > but I have > an ASCII table to map the characters to the BWHebb TrueType font. If you > wanted to use a different font with a different mapping scheme, > I'm sure we > could work that out as well. It would be good if we had a way to do transliteration into readable Roman characters also. Biola's Unbound Bible page has a transliterated BHS, but it's still far from readable (uses +'s and $'s for example). > >gn1:1 > gn1:1,1.1 B.: B.@Pp > gn1:1,1.2 R")$I^YT R")$IYT@ncfs > gn1:1,2.1 B.FRF^) B.R)_1@vqp3ms > gn1:1,3.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp Here is how I would render that portion of Gen 1:1: B.: B.Pp R")$I^YT R")$IYTncfs B.FRF^) B.R)_1vqp3ms ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYMncmp It adds a couple tags to the GBF spec (RL/Rl for Lexical form and RM/Rm for morphological tag). We might want to reverse the ordering on the text in the module rather than do it in the filter just to avoid the pain of keeping track of which parts of a line to reverse and which to maintain. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 19:59:30 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 11:59:30 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Diatheke In-Reply-To: <000601c074d7$eb585800$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: First, I would strongly recommend using the latest version of SWORD from CVS. It has a MUCH improved version of Diatheke in it that fixes many bugs and includes support for new ThML modules. It's also easier to build since it's in the SWORD source tree already, in the apps/console/diatheke directory. If you don't want to bother with getting CVS, tell me and I can post a snapshot online. > I placed all of sword-1.5.tar.gz into a directory /sword and placed > everything from kjv.zip into /html/sword > > I copied the contents of /html/kjv/kjv.conf into /sword/mods.onf > and changed > the paths like this: You will probably find it easier to use the new module configuration format, which doesn't require copying all the module .conf files into a single big mods.conf file. To use it you just need to set up an environment variable SWORD_PATH equal to the directory containing your mods.d directory. In your case I would use /sword. You could add a line "export SWORD_PATH=/sword" to one of your startup scripts, like /etc/bashrc or /etc/profile to make this the default setting for all users. Then you can just install new modules by unzipping them into /sword. The .conf files will go into /sword/mods.d and the rest of the module files will go somewhere in the /sword/modules tree. > It took me a while to figure out this is where my stuff is on the server. > When I made this change, make worked and it created two files called > diatheke.o and diatheke.d Those are both intermediate/temporary build files. There should also have been a file called, simply, "diatheke". That's the actual executable. I'd recommend putting it somewhere where it is accessible by all users (including the httpd daemon running as user nobody) such as /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin. The next thing you need to do is copy diatheke.pl and dia-def.pl into you cgi-bin directory. Now edit diatheke.pl. There are two variables at the beginning that need to be changed. $diatheke should be set to match the location of diatheke (the executable) on your machine. "nice /usr/bin/diatheke" is the default, so leave it if you placed diatheke in /usr/bin. The 'nice' should be left as well, and just tells the cgi to run the program at low priority. $sword_path should be set equal to the environment variable you set for the path, in your case "/sword". The cgi should now be set up. Loading http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl should give a blank page, with a SWORD logo at the bottom. http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl?KJV=on&verse=jn3:16 should actually show a verse. You can use index-public.html from the diatheke directory as a template for building your own HTML interface to the CGI. If you have any other questions, please do ask. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 20:53:25 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 14:53:25 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Hebrew Bible Copyright contact In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001701c074fe$0cc7a6a0$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Chris, OK. Great, I'll work on it. BTW: I also have a copy of the Hebrew Bible from the Oxford Text Archive that has been converted to MS Word using the free SIL Ezra Hebrew font. It is not morphologically tagged but it has a much more lax license agreement. I'll have to read it again, but I'm pretty sure that derivative works can be distributed if they remain free. Would you like to take a look at that file? I played around with it some and converted it to WordPerfect and to PDF as well. Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org > [mailto:owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org]On Behalf Of Chris Little > Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 1:33 PM > To: sword-devel@crosswire.org > Subject: RE: [sword-devel] Hebrew Bible Copyright contact > > > > > Most all of the Bible software packages that have the Hebrew Bible use > > The Westminster Hebrew Morphology text. Gramcord, BibleWindows, > > BibleWorks, > > Logos, WordSearch, BART, Bible Companion all use this text. I would be > > interested in contacting the license holder on behalf of the > Sword Project > > to see if you could use it. > > This sounds great, if we can get permission. > > > It looks like the transliteration scheme is in lower level ASCII, > > but I have > > an ASCII table to map the characters to the BWHebb TrueType font. If you > > wanted to use a different font with a different mapping scheme, > > I'm sure we > > could work that out as well. > > It would be good if we had a way to do transliteration into readable Roman > characters also. Biola's Unbound Bible page has a > transliterated BHS, but > it's still far from readable (uses +'s and $'s for example). > > > >gn1:1 > > gn1:1,1.1 B.: B.@Pp > > gn1:1,1.2 R")$I^YT R")$IYT@ncfs > > gn1:1,2.1 B.FRF^) B.R)_1@vqp3ms > > gn1:1,3.1 ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYM@ncmp > > Here is how I would render that portion of Gen 1:1: > > B.: B.Pp R")$I^YT R")$IYTncfs B.FRF^) > B.R)_1vqp3ms ):ELOHI^YM ):ELOHIYMncmp > > It adds a couple tags to the GBF spec (RL/Rl for Lexical form and > RM/Rm for > morphological tag). We might want to reverse the ordering on the text in > the module rather than do it in the filter just to avoid the pain > of keeping > track of which parts of a line to reverse and which to maintain. > > --Chris > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 2 21:05:23 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 15:05:23 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Diatheke In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001801c074ff$b9395a40$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Chris, Forgive my ignorance but I'm not exactly sure what "CVS" or a "snapshot" is. I think I understand everything else you have explained. Once I get it set up and have http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl working, I want to create a few nifty things using Miva. Its the only scripting language I'm real familiar with. It will be able to make a call to the http command line and get anything I ask it for and integrate it into a dynamic web page. But first I need to get Diatheke working. so I guess if you could get me that snapshot we could go from there. thanks for your help. Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org > [mailto:owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org]On Behalf Of Chris Little > Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 2:00 PM > To: sword-devel@crosswire.org > Subject: RE: [sword-devel] Diatheke > > > First, I would strongly recommend using the latest version of SWORD from > CVS. It has a MUCH improved version of Diatheke in it that fixes > many bugs > and includes support for new ThML modules. It's also easier to > build since > it's in the SWORD source tree already, in the apps/console/diatheke > directory. > > If you don't want to bother with getting CVS, tell me and I can post a > snapshot online. > > > I placed all of sword-1.5.tar.gz into a directory /sword and placed > > everything from kjv.zip into /html/sword > > > > I copied the contents of /html/kjv/kjv.conf into /sword/mods.onf > > and changed > > the paths like this: > > You will probably find it easier to use the new module > configuration format, > which doesn't require copying all the module .conf files into a single big > mods.conf file. To use it you just need to set up an environment variable > SWORD_PATH equal to the directory containing your mods.d > directory. In your > case I would use /sword. You could add a line "export > SWORD_PATH=/sword" to > one of your startup scripts, like /etc/bashrc or /etc/profile to make this > the default setting for all users. > > Then you can just install new modules by unzipping them into /sword. The > .conf files will go into /sword/mods.d and the rest of the module > files will > go somewhere in the /sword/modules tree. > > > It took me a while to figure out this is where my stuff is on > the server. > > When I made this change, make worked and it created two files called > > diatheke.o and diatheke.d > > Those are both intermediate/temporary build files. There should also have > been a file called, simply, "diatheke". That's the actual > executable. I'd > recommend putting it somewhere where it is accessible by all users > (including the httpd daemon running as user nobody) such as /usr/bin or > /usr/local/bin. > > The next thing you need to do is copy diatheke.pl and dia-def.pl into you > cgi-bin directory. Now edit diatheke.pl. There are two variables at the > beginning that need to be changed. $diatheke should be set to match the > location of diatheke (the executable) on your machine. "nice > /usr/bin/diatheke" is the default, so leave it if you placed diatheke in > /usr/bin. The 'nice' should be left as well, and just tells the > cgi to run > the program at low priority. $sword_path should be set equal to the > environment variable you set for the path, in your case "/sword". > > The cgi should now be set up. Loading > http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl should give a blank page, with a > SWORD logo at the bottom. > http://elbourne.org/cgi-bin/diatheke.pl?KJV=on&verse=jn3:16 > should actually > show a verse. You can use index-public.html from the diatheke > directory as > a template for building your own HTML interface to the CGI. > > If you have any other questions, please do ask. > > --Chris > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 3 12:59:27 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Leon Brooks) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 20:59:27 +0800 Subject: [sword-devel] make register Message-ID: <3A53222F.3000002@brooks.fdns.net> My email from ``make register'' (sword library) bounced: unknown user ``sword.users'' at crosswire.org. -- Windows 98: n. 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that can't stand 1 bit of competition. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 3 22:04:33 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 15:04:33 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] make register References: <3A53222F.3000002@brooks.fdns.net> Message-ID: <3A53A1F1.ED0F9EC9@crosswire.org> Leon, Thanks, the virtusertable had sword.user instead of sword.users. Appreciate your report. -Troy. Leon Brooks wrote: > > My email from ``make register'' (sword library) bounced: unknown user > ``sword.users'' at crosswire.org. > > -- > Windows 98: n. > 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an > 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor, > written by a 2 bit company, that can't stand 1 bit of competition. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 5 01:04:04 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 02:04:04 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] PDAs / SA1110 References: <3A4401BA.FB9FE022@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <001b01c076b3$65f78e00$0101a8c0@gandalf> Hi there I have a HP Jornada 680 Windows CE 3.0 handheld. Do you guys think the SWORD will be portable to windows CE ?? any info would be great! Peter Snoek ----- Original Message ----- From: "Troy A. Griffitts" To: ; Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2000 2:36 AM Subject: [sword-devel] PDAs / SA1110 > Hurray! I got my iPaq finally! > > I have linux installed (see http://www.ipaqlinux.com). > > I spent a little time adding a new target: arm, in the make system. You > should be able to build the sword libraries for the arm cpu now. After > having some success with the command line tools, I copied over cheatah > and reworked it slightly for a small device. The new UI is under > sword/apps/X11/micros/ It's pretty cool to see sword running on a > handheld! :) The compression drivers work really well in this > scenerio. Slow search though. It takes about 1 minute to search the > entire compressed KJV module on the ipaq. I'll post screen shots soon. > I'll also build a tarball of compiled binaries plus a few compressed > modules, for the ipaq. > > Chris, > I still want to try out your PDQ web interface. I have to get irda to > work via my Nokia 8290 now, grab a WAP browser, and then try out your > stuff. Putting all the texts on the device won't be as cool/practicle > as grabbing any text off of the website on demand! > > -Troy. > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 5 02:49:25 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 18:49:25 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] PDAs / SA1110 In-Reply-To: <001b01c076b3$65f78e00$0101a8c0@gandalf> Message-ID: > I have a HP Jornada 680 Windows CE 3.0 handheld. > Do you guys think the SWORD will be portable to windows CE ?? > any info would be great! I'm going to try my hardest to get Sword compiled for WCE 3.0 using MS's free embedded VC++. It's not going very well right now because CE lacks STL, though I found a promising portable version of STL at www.stlport.org. Once the sword library compiles, a whole new frontend will still need to be written since there aren't currently any written for Win32 using MFC that could be ported. I am very excited about the whole thing though, including possibly using MS's ClearText sub-pixel text rendering, text-to-speech and speech recognition if free libraries can be found, and synchronization of desktop & handheld personal commentaries. But first this little STL hurdle needs to be crossed. :) --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 5 20:15:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (William Deer) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 15:15:01 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] CDs WHY AM I GETTING YOUR MAIL???????????????????? References: <004001c039cd$280a0c80$b5815940@kih.net> Message-ID: <003601c07755$7a3fc920$160915ac@wnyric.org> I'd love to get a copy - Bill Deer 4125 Ransom RD Clarence, NY 14031 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Crystal Mason" To: "???" Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 8:04 AM Subject: Fw: [sword-devel] CDs WHY AM I GETTING YOUR MAIL???????????????????? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Troy A. Griffitts > To: > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 3:09 AM > Subject: [sword-devel] CDs > > > > Now that we are ALL CAUGHT UP ON CD ORDERS (WHOOO HOOOO). > > > > I would like to offer them to the developers and testers. > > > > I would love to send some of you CDs from our second official batch. If > > you would like to give me your mailing address, I will get some out > > within the next few days. > > > > Jerry, we should have lunch again! I have ton's of extras now. And the > > latest installer implements some of the suggestions you and Geoff gave > > me about locked modules. > > > > Praise God for friends, friends' girlfriends, and out of work high > > school students!!! > > -Troy. > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 6 02:14:13 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Kirt Christensen) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 21:14:13 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] PDAs / SA1110 Message-ID: OK, I've been hoping somone might take an interest in CE with me. Is this link to a CE port for stl a new one for you to consider? http://users.iol.it/g.govi/stlport_ce_en.html I'll be out for a couple of weeks to Tucson but when I return I'll try to look it over if you are not having luck with another port. Has anyone actually got the Sword libraries to link to a UI under VC++ at all yet? I have some MFC UI components built in house that I can cyphen off for making a decent UI on a ce platform. It would make for some good sanctification of the code sense much of it may become part of a weapon system on a handheld device for the infantry. >From: "Chris Little" >Reply-To: sword-devel@crosswire.org >To: >Subject: RE: [sword-devel] PDAs / SA1110 >Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 18:49:25 -0800 > > > > I have a HP Jornada 680 Windows CE 3.0 handheld. > > Do you guys think the SWORD will be portable to windows CE ?? > > any info would be great! > >I'm going to try my hardest to get Sword compiled for WCE 3.0 using MS's >free embedded VC++. It's not going very well right now because CE lacks >STL, though I found a promising portable version of STL at www.stlport.org. >Once the sword library compiles, a whole new frontend will still need to be >written since there aren't currently any written for Win32 using MFC that >could be ported. I am very excited about the whole thing though, including >possibly using MS's ClearText sub-pixel text rendering, text-to-speech and >speech recognition if free libraries can be found, and synchronization of >desktop & handheld personal commentaries. But first this little STL hurdle >needs to be crossed. :) > >--Chris > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 7 11:22:04 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 21:22:04 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings Message-ID: <3A58515C.FE3A3754@bigfoot.com> Troy, I remember sometime back you mentioned that you thought using JNI bindings to the Sword C++ libraries would be an inappropriate way to make a Java API. Can you explain why again? Thanks, Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 7 21:26:22 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 13:26:22 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] WinCE update In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I've passed the first hurdle to compiling SWORD for WinCE. STL is working with the use of STLport. Many of our source files now compile in eVC++. The problem I'm currently addressing is the lack of many basic C/C++ functions & constants in the WinCE SDK. File access and SystemV descended functions & constants in particular are absent. It's rather disappointing to see, because I had been of the impression that WinCE was a real OS (at least in the same sense as Win95 is) and not a toy OS. My first course of action will be to add headers from VC++'s Win32 SDK to the build, then to port around functions that truly don't exist for CE. Still, with the STL issues apparently worked out, I am hopeful. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 7 22:35:16 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joe Walker) Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 22:35:16 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings References: <3A58515C.FE3A3754@bigfoot.com> Message-ID: <3A58EF24.C957EF54@eireneh.com> Hi, Not sure I've seen an answer to this, and Troy may have a totally different answer, but to me JNI is sometimes useful if the native interface you need is very simple, and the functionallity it provides is complex, and no Java alternative exists. Often the complexities of debugging JNI make for a total nightmare time, and the interface code is not intuative at all. I've been programming in Java for several years and without doubt JNI is my worst experience. Websphere tries hard, but JNI takes he crown for horribility. I have some Java code to read sword data files if you are interested. Joe. Paul Gear wrote: > Troy, > > I remember sometime back you mentioned that you thought using JNI > bindings to the Sword C++ libraries would be an inappropriate way to > make a Java API. Can you explain why again? > > Thanks, > Paul > --------- > "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 > http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 8 07:58:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Tsoloane Moahloli) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 09:58:42 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings In-Reply-To: <3A58EF24.C957EF54@eireneh.com> Message-ID: Hi Joe, Just to say, I like your files. I have written some java stuff to reproduce all of the information in canon.h and should be able to reproduce VerseKey type activity in the next little while. Troy, I there somewhere we can have the Java Code stored centrally so that people can have access to it. I should have basic functionality after the weekend unless I get some unforseen emergency at work. Cheers, T. Oh and compliments of the new year to all. On 07-Jan-2001 Joe Walker wrote: > > Hi, > > Not sure I've seen an answer to this, and Troy may have a totally different > answer, but to me JNI is sometimes useful if the native interface you need is > very simple, and the functionallity it provides is complex, and no Java > alternative exists. > > Often the complexities of debugging JNI make for a total nightmare time, and > the > interface code is not intuative at all. I've been programming in Java for > several years and without doubt JNI is my worst experience. Websphere tries > hard, but JNI takes he crown for horribility. > > I have some Java code to read sword data files if you are interested. > > Joe. > > > Paul Gear wrote: > >> Troy, >> >> I remember sometime back you mentioned that you thought using JNI >> bindings to the Sword C++ libraries would be an inappropriate way to >> make a Java API. Can you explain why again? >> >> Thanks, >> Paul >> --------- >> "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 >> http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear -- An error can never become true however many times you repeat it. The truth can never be wrong, even if no one hears it. - Mahatma Gandhi Tsoloane Moahloli Zen Computing (Pty)Ltd. phone +27 11 706 7054 email: tsoloane@zen.co.za URL: http://www.zen.co.za From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 8 08:31:19 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 18:31:19 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings References: <3A58515C.FE3A3754@bigfoot.com> <3A58EF24.C957EF54@eireneh.com> Message-ID: <3A597AD7.DEDC98F4@bigfoot.com> Joe Walker wrote: > > Hi, > > Not sure I've seen an answer to this, and Troy may have a totally different > answer, but to me JNI is sometimes useful if the native interface you need is > very simple, and the functionallity it provides is complex, and no Java > alternative exists. > > Often the complexities of debugging JNI make for a total nightmare time, and the > interface code is not intuative at all. I've been programming in Java for > several years and without doubt JNI is my worst experience. Websphere tries > hard, but JNI takes he crown for horribility. > > I have some Java code to read sword data files if you are interested. I know that it's not pretty, but i think that its the best way to ensure compatibility with the C++ libraries and take advantage of new features like compression, so i'd rather bind to the real API than use a rewrite if i can. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 8 19:29:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joe Walker) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 19:29:01 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings References: <3A58515C.FE3A3754@bigfoot.com> <3A58EF24.C957EF54@eireneh.com> <3A597AD7.DEDC98F4@bigfoot.com> Message-ID: <3A5A14FD.4E4FB962@eireneh.com> Paul Gear wrote: > > Joe Walker wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Not sure I've seen an answer to this, and Troy may have a totally > > different > > answer, but to me JNI is sometimes useful if the native interface you > > need is > > very simple, and the functionallity it provides is complex, and no Java > > alternative exists. > > > > Often the complexities of debugging JNI make for a total nightmare > > time, and the > > interface code is not intuative at all. I've been programming in Java for > > several years and without doubt JNI is my worst experience. Websphere > > tries > > hard, but JNI takes he crown for horribility. > > > > I have some Java code to read sword data files if you are interested. > > I know that it's not pretty, but i think that its the best way to ensure > compatibility with the C++ libraries and take advantage of new features > like compression, so i'd rather bind to the real API than use a rewrite > if i can. Given a working Java version which only took a day or so to write from scratch given C++ source I'd say keeping up to date is a non-issue unless you intend to change the format often (I hope not) Let me add a few more things against JNI: Speed - in my current assignment we are forced to use C crypto code via JNI for DES3 instead of one of the many Java implementations. The C code is up to 30 times slower. This may be an extreme example but it does make a point. Debugging - really do not under-estimeate how hard it is to debug in 2 languages at the same time even trusty friends like printf or println start to get confused with 2 languages potentially messing with stdout/stderr. Stability - A well written 100% Java program will be very crash proof. Add a single JNI call and all of a sudden the chance or a core soars. Portability - ... Build Complexity - ... Launch Complexity - Now I have to worry about my LD_LIBRARY_PATH/PATH variables as well as my CLASSPATH variable Joe. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 8 19:32:09 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joe Walker) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 19:32:09 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings References: Message-ID: <3A5A15B9.D019F29F@eireneh.com> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------810927BB1A03BEF326827EF7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tsoloane Moahloli wrote: > > Hi Joe, > > Just to say, I like your files. ... Assuming this was a request not a complement :) ... I've attached the .java in question, and in the next few days I'll update my web site with the latest release which puts that in a servlet. Joe. --------------810927BB1A03BEF326827EF7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="RawVerse.java" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="RawVerse.java" package com.eireneh.bible.book.sword; import java.io.*; /** * Code for class 'RawVerse'- a module that reads raw text files * ot and nt using indexs ??.bks ??.cps ??.vss and provides lookup and parsing * functions based on class VerseKey */ public class RawVerse { /** constant for the introduction */ public static final int TESTAMENT_INTRO = 0; /** constant for the old testament */ public static final int TESTAMENT_OLD = 1; /** constant for the new testament */ public static final int TESTAMENT_NEW = 2; /** * RawVerse Constructor - Initializes data for instance of RawVerse * @param path - path of the directory where data and index files are located. * be sure to include the trailing separator (e.g. '/' or '\') * (e.g. 'modules/texts/rawtext/webster/') */ public RawVerse(String path) throws FileNotFoundException { idx_raf[TESTAMENT_OLD] = new RandomAccessFile(path + "ot.vss", "r"); idx_raf[TESTAMENT_NEW] = new RandomAccessFile(path + "nt.vss", "r"); txt_raf[TESTAMENT_OLD] = new RandomAccessFile(path + "ot", "r"); txt_raf[TESTAMENT_NEW] = new RandomAccessFile(path + "nt", "r"); // The original had a dtor that did the equiv of .close()ing the above // I'm not sure that there is a delete type ability in Book.java and // the finalizer for RandomAccessFile will do it anyway so for the // moment I'm going to ignore this. // The original also stored the path, but I don't think it ever used it // The original also kept an instance count, which went unused (and I // noticed in a few other places so it is either c&p or a pattern? // Either way the assumption that there is only one of a static is not // safe in many java environments (servlets, ejbs at least) so I've // deleted it } /** * Finds the offset of the key verse from the indexes * @param testament testament to find (0 - Bible/module introduction) * @param idxoff offset into .vss * @param start address to store the starting offset * @param size address to store the size of the entry */ public Location findOffset(int testament, long idxoff) throws IOException { Location loc = new Location(); // There was a bodge here to move testament around if someone wanted // to read the intro? We just have the set of static finals above // if (testament == 0) // testament = idx_raf[1] == null ? 1 : 2; // There was a test here to check ensure that is idx_raf[testament-1] // was null then we returned an default Location (of 0,0). However // This seems like papering over any errors so I have left it out for // the time being // I've now totally re-written this because we did have byte-sex // problems. The file is little endian, and we read big endianly. // read the next 6 byes. idx_raf[testament].seek(idxoff*6); byte[] read = new byte[6]; idx_raf[testament].readFully(read); int[] temp = new int[6]; for (int i=0; i= 0 ? read[i] : 256 + read[i]; System.out.println("temp["+i+"]="+temp[i]); } loc.start = (temp[3] << 24) | (temp[2] << 16) | (temp[1] << 8) | temp[0]; loc.size = (temp[5] << 8) | temp[4]; // the original lseek used SEEK_SET. This is the only option in Java // The *6 is because we use 4 bytes for the offset, and 2 for the length // There used to be some code at the start of the method like: // idxoff *= 6; // But itn't good to alter parameters and here is the only place that // it is used. // There was some BIGENDIAN swapping stuff here. To be honest I // can't be bothered to think about whether or not this is needed // right now. // *start = lelong(*start); // *size = leshort(*size); // There was also some code here to patch over any errors if you // could only read one of the 2 bytes from above. I'm not sure that // that is a good idea, so I've left it out. return loc; } /** * Gets text at a given offset. * @param testament testament file to search in (0 - Old; 1 - New) * @param loc Where to read from */ public String getText(int testament, Location loc) throws IOException { // The original had the size param as an unsigned short. // It also used SEEK_SET as above (default in Java) byte[] buffer = new byte[loc.size]; txt_raf[testament].seek(loc.start); txt_raf[testament].read(buffer); // We should probably think about encodings here? return new String(buffer); } /** * Prepares the text before returning it to external objects * @param buf buffer where text is stored and where to store the prep'd text */ protected String prepText(String text) { StringBuffer buf = new StringBuffer(text); boolean space = false; boolean cr = false; boolean realdata = false; char nlcnt = 0; int to = 0; for (int from=0; from 1) { // buf.setCharAt(to++, nl); buf.setCharAt(to++, '\n'); // nlcnt = 0; } continue; case 13: if (!realdata) continue; buf.setCharAt(to++, '\n'); space = false; cr = true; continue; } realdata = true; nlcnt = 0; if (space) { space = false; if (buf.charAt(from) != ' ') { buf.setCharAt(to++, ' '); from--; continue; } } buf.setCharAt(to++, buf.charAt(from)); } // This next line just ensured that we were null terminated. // buf.setCharAt(to, '\0'); // There followed a lot of code that stomed \o to the end of the // string if there was whitespace there. trim() is easier. return buf.toString().trim(); } /** * Sets text for current offset * @param testament testament to find (0 - Bible/module introduction) * @param idxoff offset into .vss * @param buf buffer to store */ protected void setText(int testament, long idxoff, String buf) throws IOException { // As in getText() we don't alter the formal parameter // idxoff *= 6; // As in getText() There was some messing around with testament // if (testament == 0) // testament = idx_raf[1] == null ? 1 : 2; // outsize started off being unsigned // and it looks like "unsigned short size;" is not used short outsize = (short) buf.length(); // There was some more BIGENDIAN nonsense here. Again ignoring the // MACOSX bits it looked like: // start = lelong(start); // outsize = leshort(size); // I've also moved things around very slightly, the endian bits came // just before the writeShort(); idx_raf[testament].seek(idxoff*6); long start = idx_raf[testament].readLong(); idx_raf[testament].writeShort(outsize); // There is some encoding stuff to be thought about here byte[] data = buf.getBytes(); txt_raf[testament].seek(start); txt_raf[testament].write(data); } /** * Creates new module files * @param path Directory to store module files */ public static void createModule(String path) throws IOException { truncate(path + "ot.vss"); truncate(path + "nt.vss"); truncate(path + "ot"); truncate(path + "nt"); // I'm not at all sure what these did. I'd guess they wrote data to // the files we just created? But how they'd neatly (or otherwise) go // about this is beyond me right now. // RawVerse rv(path); // VerseKey mykey("Rev 22:21"); } /** * Create an empty file, deleting what was there */ private static void truncate(String filename) throws IOException { // The original code did something like this. I recon this basically // deleted and recreated (empty) the named file. // unlink(buf); // fd = FileMgr::systemFileMgr.open(buf, O_CREAT|O_WRONLY|O_BINARY, S_IREAD|S_IWRITE); // FileMgr::systemFileMgr.close(fd); File file = new File(filename); file.delete(); file.createNewFile(); } /** * There has to be a better method than this. findoffset() returned a start * and and offset, and multiple return values are not possible in Java. * It seems to me that returning start and size from a public i/f represents * showing our callers more than we should and I expect that the solution * lies in a thorough sorting out if the interface, but I want to keep * the methods unchanged as reasonable right now. */ public class Location { /** Where does the data start */ public long start = 0; /** The data length. Is short long enough? the original was unsigned short */ public int size = 0; /** * Debug only */ public String toString() { return "start="+start+", size="+size; } } /** * A test program */ public static void main(String[] args) { try { // To start with I'm going to hard code the path String path = "/usr/apps/sword/modules/texts/rawtext/kjv/"; RawVerse verse = new RawVerse(path); Location loc = verse.findOffset(RawVerse.TESTAMENT_NEW, 6); String pre = verse.getText(RawVerse.TESTAMENT_NEW, loc); System.out.println("loc="+loc); System.out.println("pre="+pre); System.out.println("post="+verse.prepText(pre)); } catch (Exception ex) { ex.printStackTrace(); } } /** The array of index files */ private RandomAccessFile[] idx_raf = new RandomAccessFile[3]; /** The array of data files */ private RandomAccessFile[] txt_raf = new RandomAccessFile[3]; } --------------810927BB1A03BEF326827EF7-- From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 9 04:38:56 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (David Twyerould) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 15:38:56 +1100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie Message-ID: Hi! I've just joined the Sword developer forum and I'm interested in helping out with a Java version of Sword. I have a few questions that perhaps someone could help me with. (1). what is the functionality that sword is trying to provide? Is there are requirements document or a list of desired functions somewhere? (2). what is the architecture/design that is being followed? Is there a spec or a description of the current implementation? Is there any documentation on the file formats? I'm keen to help out with the Java version of Sword, I am an experienced Java developer (last 4 years in enterprise and web development). Is anyone heading up this development? Troy put me on to the CVS server where there is the beginnings of a port of the C++ code to Java - but it looks like there is a lot to be done..? By the way, is there an online archive somewhere of this forum so I don't have to ask silly questions that have already been answered? Regards, David Twyerould e-Business Solutions Development (South.), IBM Global Services (CS13). Australia Ph: +61-3-96270345 Mobile: +61-0412-265186 Notes: David Twyerould/Australia/IBM Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 10 19:41:59 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:41:59 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] http://www.ccel.org/facsim/ Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> --=====================_10652963==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed CCEL has a system for using digital facsimiles of texts on-line along with ORC versions of the texts so that the OCR texts can be proofread and corrected on-line. The software for doing this is being distributed under the GNU Public License. Perhaps Chris or Troy could provide a site for texts that would be of use with the Sword but could use this type of proofreading and editing. Or, such texts could be sent to CCEL for editing there. Jerry --=====================_10652963==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" CCEL has a system for using digital facsimiles of texts on-line along with ORC versions of the texts so that the OCR texts can be proofread and corrected on-line. The software for doing this is being distributed under the GNU Public License.

Perhaps Chris or Troy could provide a site for texts that would be of use with the Sword but could use this type of proofreading and editing. Or, such texts could be sent to CCEL for editing there.

Jerry --=====================_10652963==_.ALT-- From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 10 21:03:22 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Martin Gruner) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:03:22 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] http://www.ccel.org/facsim/ In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> References: <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <01011022032200.25435@martin> Very good idea. Martin > > CCEL has a system for using digital facsimiles of texts on-line along with > ORC versions of the texts so that the OCR texts can be proofread and > corrected on-line. The software for doing this is being distributed under > the GNU Public License. > > Perhaps Chris or Troy could provide a site for texts that would be of use > with the Sword but could use this type of proofreading and editing. Or, > such texts could be sent to CCEL for editing there. > > Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 10:21:48 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (David Burry) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 02:21:48 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] http://www.ccel.org/facsim/ In-Reply-To: <01011022032200.25435@martin> References: <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20010111014052.0204c4a0@beaver> I would be willing to personally donate a copy of Adobe Acrobat Capture, Personal Edition (20,000 page license) to God's work of converting Copyright-free/permission-granted Biblical texts into unencumbered freely distributable online form if anyone here would seriously be able to put it to good use..... As an employee I am able to purchase up to 5 copies of this product per year for a substantial discount. If anyone's trying to profit off of me from it they can jolly well pay the regular price for it and help my stock options in the process but when I freely receive I want to freely give, and when I see others freely giving that's who I want to give back to. See http://www.adobe.com/products/acrcapture/main.html for more info. Dave Senior Web Developer, Adobe Systems At 10:03 PM 1/10/2001 +0100, Martin Gruner wrote: >Very good idea. > >Martin > > > > CCEL has a system for using digital facsimiles of texts on-line along > with > > ORC versions of the texts so that the OCR texts can be proofread and > > corrected on-line. The software for doing this is being distributed under > > the GNU Public License. > > > > Perhaps Chris or Troy could provide a site for texts that would be of use > > with the Sword but could use this type of proofreading and editing. Or, > > such texts could be sent to CCEL for editing there. > > > > Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 18:12:33 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 11:12:33 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] http://www.ccel.org/facsim/ In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.0.20010111014052.0204c4a0@beaver> References: <01011022032200.25435@martin> <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010110122800.009ef470@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010111102736.00949ae0@mail.dancris.com> That is a nice offer, Dave. In the past Bible Foundation has scanned PD works, but we have not done that in long time. Most of what we have gotten has been from others that have scanned, OCRed and edited the works. We don't have Windows NT so I don't think we could take your offer for our computers. However, we could still scan and OCR some texts if others would proofread and edit them. Which is the nice thing about http://www.ccel.org/facsim/ . After the page images and OCRed pages are put on-line. It allows multiple users to select pages for reading and editing without each reader needing an original text. Troy has also done some work to provide a bases for Sword users to edit Sword texts and send the corrections in. I don't know how that is coming, but it would be nice to have new texts go through some proofreading before general distribution. Jerry Hastings Bible Foundation At 02:21 AM 1/11/2001 -0800, David Burry wrote: >I would be willing to personally donate a copy of Adobe Acrobat Capture, >Personal Edition (20,000 page license) to God's work of converting >Copyright-free/permission-granted Biblical texts into unencumbered freely >distributable online form if anyone here would seriously be able to put it >to good use..... As an employee I am able to purchase up to 5 copies of >this product per year for a substantial discount. If anyone's trying to >profit off of me from it they can jolly well pay the regular price for it > and help my stock options in the process but when I freely >receive I want to freely give, and when I see others freely giving that's >who I want to give back to. > >See http://www.adobe.com/products/acrcapture/main.html for more info. > >Dave > >Senior Web Developer, Adobe Systems From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 19:05:18 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 20:05:18 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie References: Message-ID: <001b01c07c01$73154840$0101a8c0@gandalf> Hi David good question... I dropped in here a few weeks ago. I managed to connect myself to the CVS server and downloaded the stuff in there. (I tried to wrote a step-by-step about it). And thats where I am now. I have both Delphi 5 Enterprise and CBuilder 5 (no experience with C though). I am too looking for some general desriptions, architecture, wish-list, status list or whatever. Is there anyone in here who's got this documents? Or can we find em somewhere in the CVS? Peter Snoek - The Netherlands ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Twyerould" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 5:38 AM Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > Hi! I've just joined the Sword developer forum and I'm interested in > helping out with a Java version of Sword. I have a few questions that > perhaps someone could help me with. > > (1). what is the functionality that sword is trying to provide? Is there > are requirements document or a list of desired functions somewhere? > (2). what is the architecture/design that is being followed? Is there a > spec or a description of the current implementation? Is there any > documentation on the file formats? > > I'm keen to help out with the Java version of Sword, I am an experienced > Java developer (last 4 years in enterprise and web development). Is anyone > heading up this development? Troy put me on to the CVS server where there > is the beginnings of a port of the C++ code to Java - but it looks like > there is a lot to be done..? > > By the way, is there an online archive somewhere of this forum so I don't > have to ask silly questions that have already been answered? > > Regards, > David Twyerould > e-Business Solutions Development (South.), IBM Global Services (CS13). > Australia > Ph: +61-3-96270345 Mobile: +61-0412-265186 > Notes: David Twyerould/Australia/IBM Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com > "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 21:24:17 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:24:17 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie References: <001b01c07c01$73154840$0101a8c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <3A5E2481.BBF899AF@crosswire.org> Have you guys worked thru the api primer on the website? http://www.crosswire.org/sword/ then Development, then API Primer There is some stuff this might be a little old, but is about 90% accurate :) I would then step thru the examples, tests, utilities directories. -Troy. Peter Snoek wrote: > > Hi David > > good question... > I dropped in here a few weeks ago. I managed to connect myself to the > CVS server and downloaded the stuff in there. (I tried to wrote a > step-by-step > about it). > > And thats where I am now. I have both Delphi 5 Enterprise and CBuilder 5 > (no experience with C though). I am too looking for some general > desriptions, > architecture, wish-list, status list or whatever. > > Is there anyone in here who's got this documents? > Or can we find em somewhere in the CVS? > > Peter Snoek - The Netherlands > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Twyerould" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 5:38 AM > Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > > > Hi! I've just joined the Sword developer forum and I'm interested in > > helping out with a Java version of Sword. I have a few questions that > > perhaps someone could help me with. > > > > (1). what is the functionality that sword is trying to provide? Is there > > are requirements document or a list of desired functions somewhere? > > (2). what is the architecture/design that is being followed? Is there a > > spec or a description of the current implementation? Is there any > > documentation on the file formats? > > > > I'm keen to help out with the Java version of Sword, I am an experienced > > Java developer (last 4 years in enterprise and web development). Is anyone > > heading up this development? Troy put me on to the CVS server where there > > is the beginnings of a port of the C++ code to Java - but it looks like > > there is a lot to be done..? > > > > By the way, is there an online archive somewhere of this forum so I don't > > have to ask silly questions that have already been answered? > > > > Regards, > > David Twyerould > > e-Business Solutions Development (South.), IBM Global Services (CS13). > > Australia > > Ph: +61-3-96270345 Mobile: +61-0412-265186 > > Notes: David Twyerould/Australia/IBM Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com > > "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) > > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 22:21:55 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 23:21:55 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie References: <001b01c07c01$73154840$0101a8c0@gandalf> <3A5E2481.BBF899AF@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <002001c07c1c$e8324130$0101a8c0@gandalf> Hi Troy, thanks for the direction. I will experiment with the API. I think I have seen a delphi 'port' of the API. Is this correct? Do you think it is usefull to write an delphi/pascal 'howto' to get newbies (like myself) going on in the project? Or should I focus on a specific programming issue? Any ideas are welcome. I will experiment further with the examples and tests, and see if I can compile the thing in CBuilder 5 and Delphi 5. kind regards, Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Troy A. Griffitts" To: Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 10:24 PM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > Have you guys worked thru the api primer on the website? > > http://www.crosswire.org/sword/ > then Development, then API Primer > > There is some stuff this might be a little old, but is about 90% > accurate :) > I would then step thru the examples, tests, utilities directories. > > -Troy. > > > > Peter Snoek wrote: > > > > Hi David > > > > good question... > > I dropped in here a few weeks ago. I managed to connect myself to the > > CVS server and downloaded the stuff in there. (I tried to wrote a > > step-by-step > > about it). > > > > And thats where I am now. I have both Delphi 5 Enterprise and CBuilder 5 > > (no experience with C though). I am too looking for some general > > desriptions, > > architecture, wish-list, status list or whatever. > > > > Is there anyone in here who's got this documents? > > Or can we find em somewhere in the CVS? > > > > Peter Snoek - The Netherlands > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David Twyerould" > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 5:38 AM > > Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > > > > > Hi! I've just joined the Sword developer forum and I'm interested in > > > helping out with a Java version of Sword. I have a few questions that > > > perhaps someone could help me with. > > > > > > (1). what is the functionality that sword is trying to provide? Is there > > > are requirements document or a list of desired functions somewhere? > > > (2). what is the architecture/design that is being followed? Is there a > > > spec or a description of the current implementation? Is there any > > > documentation on the file formats? > > > > > > I'm keen to help out with the Java version of Sword, I am an experienced > > > Java developer (last 4 years in enterprise and web development). Is anyone > > > heading up this development? Troy put me on to the CVS server where there > > > is the beginnings of a port of the C++ code to Java - but it looks like > > > there is a lot to be done..? > > > > > > By the way, is there an online archive somewhere of this forum so I don't > > > have to ask silly questions that have already been answered? > > > > > > Regards, > > > David Twyerould > > > e-Business Solutions Development (South.), IBM Global Services (CS13). > > > Australia > > > Ph: +61-3-96270345 Mobile: +61-0412-265186 > > > Notes: David Twyerould/Australia/IBM Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com > > > "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) > > > > > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 11 22:34:41 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 15:34:41 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie References: <001b01c07c01$73154840$0101a8c0@gandalf> <3A5E2481.BBF899AF@crosswire.org> <002001c07c1c$e8324130$0101a8c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <3A5E3501.8FDFFA09@crosswire.org> for CBuilder5 open: sword/apps/windoze/CBuilder5/biblecs/swordprj.bpg This should build the entire environment with the main windows executable. It separates the api into a lib, so you should be able to add your own exe experiments easily. I think there is a utilities/build... something for building some of the utilities as commandline tools. -Troy. PS. I'm outta here for the weekend. I'll try to check mail... Peter Snoek wrote: > > Hi Troy, > > thanks for the direction. > I will experiment with the API. > I think I have seen a delphi 'port' of the API. Is this correct? > > Do you think it is usefull to write an delphi/pascal 'howto' to > get newbies (like myself) going on in the project? > Or should I focus on a specific programming issue? > Any ideas are welcome. > > I will experiment further with the examples and tests, and see > if I can compile the thing in CBuilder 5 and Delphi 5. > > kind regards, > > Peter > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Troy A. Griffitts" > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 10:24 PM > Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > > > Have you guys worked thru the api primer on the website? > > > > http://www.crosswire.org/sword/ > > then Development, then API Primer > > > > There is some stuff this might be a little old, but is about 90% > > accurate :) > > I would then step thru the examples, tests, utilities directories. > > > > -Troy. > > > > > > > > Peter Snoek wrote: > > > > > > Hi David > > > > > > good question... > > > I dropped in here a few weeks ago. I managed to connect myself to the > > > CVS server and downloaded the stuff in there. (I tried to wrote a > > > step-by-step > > > about it). > > > > > > And thats where I am now. I have both Delphi 5 Enterprise and CBuilder 5 > > > (no experience with C though). I am too looking for some general > > > desriptions, > > > architecture, wish-list, status list or whatever. > > > > > > Is there anyone in here who's got this documents? > > > Or can we find em somewhere in the CVS? > > > > > > Peter Snoek - The Netherlands > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "David Twyerould" > > > To: > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 5:38 AM > > > Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie > > > > > > > Hi! I've just joined the Sword developer forum and I'm interested in > > > > helping out with a Java version of Sword. I have a few questions that > > > > perhaps someone could help me with. > > > > > > > > (1). what is the functionality that sword is trying to provide? Is > there > > > > are requirements document or a list of desired functions somewhere? > > > > (2). what is the architecture/design that is being followed? Is there > a > > > > spec or a description of the current implementation? Is there any > > > > documentation on the file formats? > > > > > > > > I'm keen to help out with the Java version of Sword, I am an > experienced > > > > Java developer (last 4 years in enterprise and web development). Is > anyone > > > > heading up this development? Troy put me on to the CVS server where > there > > > > is the beginnings of a port of the C++ code to Java - but it looks > like > > > > there is a lot to be done..? > > > > > > > > By the way, is there an online archive somewhere of this forum so I > don't > > > > have to ask silly questions that have already been answered? > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > David Twyerould > > > > e-Business Solutions Development (South.), IBM Global Services > (CS13). > > > > Australia > > > > Ph: +61-3-96270345 Mobile: +61-0412-265186 > > > > Notes: David Twyerould/Australia/IBM Internet: > dtwy@au1.ibm.com > > > > "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) > > > > > > > > > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 02:44:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (David Twyerould) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 13:44:34 +1100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie Message-ID: Troy, the API primer looks good if you're working with the C/C++ code and the C/C++ code API seems fairly complete. But I'm not sure it helps people working with other programming languages (eg Pascal/Java etc) that much though. For example, the java port has a lot missing so someone wanting to work on this is going to need a lot more basic understanding of how things work "under the covers" - file formats and the like. There don't appear to be a lot of comments in the C/C++ code to explain what is going on. Is it expected (or required) that all ports will (or should) work the same way as the C code? Is anyone currently working on the Java code port? If so, how can I help?? Regards & God bless... David Twyerould Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 11:33:13 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:33:13 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] portability Message-ID: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> Hi, The debian packages are coming along, but this issue has come up. At the moment you need to choose the platform manually. But when the debian autobuilders try to build the package they will need to determine it themselves. One option is autoconf (you don't have to have automake as well so the build system can stay virtually the same). I'll probably have a go at it over the weekend, but I was just wondering if anyone had any thoughts first? Daniel ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Date sent: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 16:33:31 -0800 From: Ron Farrer To: Daniel Glassey Subject: your packages Hi; I've looked over your packages and each has a couple minor things that need to be changed. Let's start with sword. I have sword-1.5.1a, is this the latest version? The first thing that needs to be changed is the makefile. It assumes the system is intel, always. This will break on other platforms, especially with the autobuild scripts (most archs are using autobuild scripts). You can change it to automatically determine the platform and add entries for all of them (alpha, sparc, powerpc, arm, etc) which would be easiest or convert over to autoconf (probably better for long run). Which ever you decide is up to you and I'd suggest sending your patches upstream so they may be included in future releases.=20 Regards, Ron --=20 Email: , Home: Alpha News Network: ------- End of forwarded message ------- _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 11:33:16 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:33:16 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] module format Message-ID: <3A5EEB7C.19165.14FC245F@localhost> I've started packing some modules for Debian, but it's rather tedious by hand (especially trying to extract the copyright from amongst other info). I'm sure it could be automated, but the modules would need to be standardised. At the moment different files are included in the module directory depending on the modules, readmes, copyright stuff, ... I would propose: (1) only 1 copy of .conf - in mods.d (it's too confusing if there is one in the module directory as well.) (2)a separate directory doc/ where any extra documentation for the module goes. (3)a copyright directory where the copyright goes in a file (4)_only_ module data files go in the module directory modules/// (5)the copyright could also be a specific part of .conf Thoughts? Daniel P.S. I've had a quick look at the jsword files and am thinking about adding a pkgType tgz for module.tar.gz. (it helps for making debs if the source is like that) using the java tar module http://www.trustice.com/java/tar/ (www.gjt.org where the files are is down at the mo though :/ ) but I'm not sure how to intergrate it, though it ought to be similar to ZipStream, and don't have anything set up to test it on. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 14:28:07 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Tsoloane Moahloli) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 16:28:07 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [sword-devel] Java JNI bindings In-Reply-To: <3A5A15B9.D019F29F@eireneh.com> Message-ID: Hmm Okay, I have implemented basic VerseKey functionality and have gotten this to provide the right output using your RawVerse class. It is still fairly limited in terms of the following: Currently only doing one verse at time display (Should change over the weekend) Needs to be more flexible in terms of how requests for verses are input. Anyway, I will see how much I can do over the weekend and send the files over later. Oh, Joe, you did send me the files earlier, I just didn't get around to interfacing with then in anyway until now. Cheers, have a good weekend and God bless Y'all T On 08-Jan-2001 Joe Walker wrote: > Tsoloane Moahloli wrote: >> >> Hi Joe, >> >> Just to say, I like your files. > > ... > > Assuming this was a request not a complement :) ... > I've attached the .java in question, and in the next few days > I'll update my web site with the latest release which puts that in > a servlet. > > Joe. -- An error can never become true however many times you repeat it. The truth can never be wrong, even if no one hears it. - Mahatma Gandhi Tsoloane Moahloli Zen Computing (Pty)Ltd. phone +27 11 706 7054 email: tsoloane@zen.co.za URL: http://www.zen.co.za From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 18:23:59 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joe Walker) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 18:23:59 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword Newbie References: Message-ID: <3A5F4BBF.86A26513@eireneh.com> Hi, There is a nearly complete Java servlet project. It read Sword files and has the basics of a simple GUI too. The source (GPL) is available: http://www.eireneh.com/package.tar.gz In the next week or so I should have the servlet version on the web site working. Joe David Twyerould wrote: > > Troy, the API primer looks good if you're working with the C/C++ code and > the C/C++ code API seems fairly complete. But I'm not sure it helps people > working with other programming languages (eg Pascal/Java etc) that much > though. For example, the java port has a lot missing so someone wanting to > work on this is going to need a lot more basic understanding of how things > work "under the covers" - file formats and the like. There don't appear to > be a lot of comments in the C/C++ code to explain what is going on. > > Is it expected (or required) that all ports will (or should) work the same > way as the C code? > > Is anyone currently working on the Java code port? If so, how can I help?? > > Regards & God bless... > David Twyerould > Internet: dtwy@au1.ibm.com > "...and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:32) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 12 21:43:20 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Nathan) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 23:43:20 +0200 Subject: [sword-devel] Corrupt Bible texts in other languages!! In-Reply-To: <3A5F4BBF.86A26513@eireneh.com> Message-ID: <000701c07ce0$ae792f70$02801c0a@hsjnbdns.jnb.sap-ag.de> Good day everyone I have been looking at some of the Bibles in the other languages. I have noticed that the text in many of them have characters missing!! Example 1: Vietnamese, Genesis 1:3 It reads (in 'English'): "c Chuùa Trôøi phaùn raèng: ..." It should read: "Ñöùc Chuùa Trôøi phaùn raèng: ..." The first 3 characters are missing. Example 2: Turkish, Matthew 1:1 It reads (in 'English'): "brahim oðlu ..." It should read: "Ýbrahim oðlu ..." The first character is missing. Example 3: Romanian, Genesis 1:7 It reads: "i Dumnezeu a f¹cut întinderea..." The first character is missing. Example 4: Hungarian, Genesis 1:3 It reads: "s monda Isten..." It should read: "És monda Isten..." The first character is missing. Conclusion: If the verse started with characters of value > 127, these characters were thrown away. I have checked these with other Bibles on the Internet, and have confirmed that this is a problem. This means that the web interfaces like Diatheke, etc. are also giving out "chopped-off" verses in their Bibles. Could this have been the conversion tool from Online Bible? Regards, nathan http://www.nathan.co.za From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 13 01:56:47 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jen (a.k.a. GLAZE) Noe) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 17:56:47 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Message-Id: <12010112.64606@webbox.com> Message-ID: <200101130148.SAA09096@www.crosswire.org> unsubscribe Under the Mercy, Jen (a.k.a. GLAZE) Noe glaze@geek.com ------ Geek.com WebBox - http://www.geek.com A free service provided by WebBox - http://webbox.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 13 07:56:52 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 00:56:52 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Corrupt Bible texts in other languages!! References: <000701c07ce0$ae792f70$02801c0a@hsjnbdns.jnb.sap-ag.de> Message-ID: <3A600A44.41453F03@crosswire.org> Nathan, Thank you. These modules are hard for us to verify, since we do not personally understand these languages. You have given a good point, though. We could have verified them with another online version of the same text. Thanks again. I am still kindof hoping that someone intimate with these languages will take ownership of their maintenance. -Troy. Nathan wrote: > > Good day everyone > > I have been looking at some of the Bibles in the other > languages. I have noticed that the text in many of them > have characters missing!! > > Example 1: Vietnamese, Genesis 1:3 > It reads (in 'English'): "c Chuùa Trôøi phaùn raèng: ..." > It should read: "Ñöùc Chuùa Trôøi phaùn raèng: ..." > The first 3 characters are missing. > > Example 2: Turkish, Matthew 1:1 > It reads (in 'English'): "brahim oðlu ..." > It should read: "Ýbrahim oðlu ..." > The first character is missing. > > Example 3: Romanian, Genesis 1:7 > It reads: "i Dumnezeu a f¹cut întinderea..." > The first character is missing. > > Example 4: Hungarian, Genesis 1:3 > It reads: "s monda Isten..." > It should read: "És monda Isten..." > The first character is missing. > > Conclusion: If the verse started with characters of value > 127, > these characters were thrown away. > > I have checked these with other Bibles on the Internet, > and have confirmed that this is a problem. This means that > the web interfaces like Diatheke, etc. are also giving out > "chopped-off" verses in their Bibles. > > Could this have been the conversion tool from Online Bible? > > Regards, > nathan > http://www.nathan.co.za From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 13 13:23:09 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Bill Schuh) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 05:23:09 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Another Newbie....... Message-ID: <015d01c07d63$fcd314a0$f1c8fea9@laptop> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_015A_01C07D20.EA7F2340 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have just joined as well... I am not a programmer - however I do enjoy playing with beta software = and finding bugs. What can I do to help??? Also - where do I send ideas on product development or changes?? And one last question - where do the unlock keys get applied for locked = modules?? Thanks a million...... Bill <>< ------=_NextPart_000_015A_01C07D20.EA7F2340 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have just joined as = well...
 
I am not a programmer - however I do = enjoy playing=20 with beta software and finding bugs.
 
What can I do to help???
 
Also - where do I send ideas on product = development=20 or changes??
 
And one last question - where do the = unlock keys=20 get applied for locked modules??
 
Thanks a million......
 
Bill = <><
------=_NextPart_000_015A_01C07D20.EA7F2340-- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 14 13:26:22 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Martin Gruner) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 14:26:22 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] portability In-Reply-To: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> References: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> Message-ID: <01011414262203.00558@martin> Why not change the whole make system to autoconf/automake? We use it in bibletime, and IMO it makes maintaining more easy. Probably it would make porting sword / building on different architectures more easy? Maybe the sword cvs package should be split into (1) core lib and documentation (used by other projects), (2) module making and misc tools and (3) apps (sword for windows and other apps). Maybe a new package could be set up for module development. (or package 2 extended for this use) Martin On Freitag, 12. Januar 2001 12:33, you wrote: > Hi, > The debian packages are coming along, but this issue has come up. At > the moment you need to choose the platform manually. But when the > debian autobuilders try to build the package they will need to > determine it themselves. > One option is autoconf (you don't have to have automake as well so > the build system can stay virtually the same). I'll probably have a go > at it over the weekend, but I was just wondering if anyone had any > thoughts first? > > Daniel From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 15 01:43:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Bill Schuh) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 17:43:01 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] portability References: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> <01011414262203.00558@martin> Message-ID: <002901c07e94$8184d680$f1c8fea9@laptop> THANK YOU AGAIN!!!! A couple of quick questions: 1) What time do the lesson begin? 2) I know the Scouts need a face mask, water-proof gloves and gogles - do they need anything else? Because of people like you these Scouts have the opportunity to experience many new things that they would not otherwise be able to afford...... Bill Schuh Pack 585 wlschuh@yahoo.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Martin Gruner To: Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 5:26 AM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] portability > Why not change the whole make system to autoconf/automake? We use it in > bibletime, and IMO it makes maintaining more easy. Probably it would make > porting sword / building on different architectures more easy? > > Maybe the sword cvs package should be split into (1) core lib and > documentation (used by other projects), (2) module making and misc tools and > (3) apps (sword for windows and other apps). Maybe a new package could be set > up for module development. (or package 2 extended for this use) > > Martin > > On Freitag, 12. Januar 2001 12:33, you wrote: > > Hi, > > The debian packages are coming along, but this issue has come up. At > > the moment you need to choose the platform manually. But when the > > debian autobuilders try to build the package they will need to > > determine it themselves. > > One option is autoconf (you don't have to have automake as well so > > the build system can stay virtually the same). I'll probably have a go > > at it over the weekend, but I was just wondering if anyone had any > > thoughts first? > > > > Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 15 01:45:29 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Bill Schuh) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 17:45:29 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] portability References: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> <01011414262203.00558@martin> Message-ID: <002f01c07e94$d7fb3cc0$f1c8fea9@laptop> SO SORRY FOLKS - please ignore the las post from me - it was sent on the wrong address.... PLEASE FORGIVE ME - An old fool...... Bill <>< ----- Original Message ----- From: Martin Gruner To: Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 5:26 AM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] portability > Why not change the whole make system to autoconf/automake? We use it in > bibletime, and IMO it makes maintaining more easy. Probably it would make > porting sword / building on different architectures more easy? > > Maybe the sword cvs package should be split into (1) core lib and > documentation (used by other projects), (2) module making and misc tools and > (3) apps (sword for windows and other apps). Maybe a new package could be set > up for module development. (or package 2 extended for this use) > > Martin > > On Freitag, 12. Januar 2001 12:33, you wrote: > > Hi, > > The debian packages are coming along, but this issue has come up. At > > the moment you need to choose the platform manually. But when the > > debian autobuilders try to build the package they will need to > > determine it themselves. > > One option is autoconf (you don't have to have automake as well so > > the build system can stay virtually the same). I'll probably have a go > > at it over the weekend, but I was just wondering if anyone had any > > thoughts first? > > > > Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 15 07:15:14 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Robyn Manning) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 17:45:14 +1030 Subject: [sword-devel] What is there to be done? Message-ID: <01011517451401.01149@kanga> Hi all How can I help? Is there any web admin that needs doing? How do I unlock a module - unencrypt a module? I have NIV installed but can't read anything, I've installed the key from within Bibletime. Robyn From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 15 11:32:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:32:34 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] portability In-Reply-To: <01011414262203.00558@martin> References: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> Message-ID: <3A62DFD2.32624.6CB6EE@localhost> On 14 Jan 2001, at 14:26, Martin Gruner sent forth the message: > Why not change the whole make system to autoconf/automake? We use it in > bibletime, and IMO it makes maintaining more easy. Probably it would make > porting sword / building on different architectures more easy? autoconf is fine. I tried automake before, but it is very messy when you have lots of sub and sub-sub directories in the source tree. The current build system works fine apart from autoconfiguration which is what autoconf is for, so it's probably best to say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". > Maybe the sword cvs package should be split into (1) core lib and > documentation (used by other projects), (2) module making and misc tools and (3) > apps (sword for windows and other apps). Maybe a new package could be set up for > module development. (or package 2 extended for this use) This I would like to see though. The apps/windoze directory is over 5MB and is pretty irrelevant for linux develpment. Bibletime, the KDE frontend is in a seperate cvs archive, maybe the windows frontend should be the same? Same for diatheke. (2) is probably useful in the main archive unless, as you say, a new package is set up for module dev. Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 15 10:44:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Uwe Koloska) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:44:46 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] portability In-Reply-To: <002f01c07e94$d7fb3cc0$f1c8fea9@laptop> References: <3A5EEB79.2932.14FC17DC@localhost> <01011414262203.00558@martin> <002f01c07e94$d7fb3cc0$f1c8fea9@laptop> Message-ID: <01011511444600.01087@bilbo> You wrote on Montag, 15. Januar 2001 02:45: >SO SORRY FOLKS - please ignore the las post from me - it was sent on the >wrong address.... > >PLEASE FORGIVE ME - > >An old fool...... > >Bill <>< Please learn from this, to only cite the part of the message that you need for your answer. If you have cited the message at the top and tried to delete all unwanted stuff, you have seen that the topic is _very_ different. So folks: Outlook is a mess -- but if you want / need to continue using it, rework the settings!!! (for example: no html mail, cite message above, ...) For german people there is a good OE FAQ at http://www.trionet.de/~florenzvillegas/OE-FAQ Thank you Uwe -- mailto:koloska@rcs.urz.tu-dresden.de http://rcswww.urz.tu-dresden.de/~koloska/ -- -- right now the web page is in german only but this will change as time goes by ;-) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 17 03:18:07 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Geoffrey W Hastings) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 19:18:07 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Edit Notes. Message-ID: <20010116.191936.-552163.5.geoffreyhastings@juno.com> Did the delete note ever get changed to prevent accidental deletion. I was working on a study last week during my lunch break. I was going back and forth adding many verse references to my note. Scince I only have 30 minutes to eat and work on my notes I was trying to work quickly. 3 times in a half hour I deleted my work by letting go of the mouse button to soon.. Another nice feature would be the ability to keep your edit note window open while using the program. This would allow you to keep working without closing, saving and returning to open and edit over and over. I was thinking today that along with the personal notes tab it might be a nice feature to have a Sermon notes tab. Many pastors now prepare their sermon outlines using BIble software and could easily post them on their church web site for members to paste into the appropriate place in there Sermon note. This would allow them to not be mixed with their own personal notes. For an example here is a list of verses that could be copied and pasted in at John 3:3 . They are to be read straight through pausing at each double spaced line. I read them to my junior high class this way to show them how the Bible speaks of our salvation. I plan to set these up with a list at the top of all the verses as a links. SALVATION John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 1 John 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. 1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 1 John 4:1| We love him, because he first loved us. 1 John 4:14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. 1 John 5:11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 1 Timothy 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. Luke 12:15 And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth. Mark 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Acts 16:30 … What must I do to be saved? Acts 16:31 ... Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Galatians 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Ephesians 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast. Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. 2 Timothy 3:15 …. thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. Hebrews 10:38 Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. Isaiah 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. Matthew 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. 1 John 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. 1 Thessalonians 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, Hebrews 2:3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 5:8 But God commends his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 1 Corinthians 15:3 … Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 1 Corinthians 15:4 And … he was buried, and … he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: Romans 10:9 … if you shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in you heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved. Romans 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Romans 10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. Romans 10:12 ¶ For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. Luke 18:13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. Psalms 25:18 Look upon mine affliction and my pain; and forgive all my sins. Luke 15:10 Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth. Luke 10:20 Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven. Psalms 13:5 But I have trusted in thy mercy; my heart shall rejoice in thy salvation. Psalms 16:11 Thou wilt shew me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore. Psalms 30:5 For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favour is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning. Psalms 35:9 And my soul shall be joyful in the LORD: it shall rejoice in his salvation. Psalms 27:1 The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the LORD is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid? Psalms 90:14 O satisfy us early with thy mercy; that we may rejoice and be glad all our days. Proverbs 3:1 My son, forget not my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments: Proverbs 3:2 For length of days, and long life, and peace, shall they add to thee. Nehemiah 8:10 … for the joy of the LORD is your strength. Psalms 119:165 Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them. Isaiah 26:3 Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee. Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: Galatians 1:3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, John 14:27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. 2 Corinthians 13:11 … Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you. Philippians 4:4 Rejoice in the Lord alway: and again I say, Rejoice. Philippians 4:6 Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. Philippians 4:7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus. 1 John 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. John 20:21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 17 05:13:18 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 21:13:18 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Getting willing people to work! Message-ID: <003801c08044$62da9ec0$9a8e2d3f@family> Dear Everyone, I hope that everyone at least got to take a little break on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day! I have sitting here in my mail folders two e-mails from people that have openly stated on the sword-devel mailinglist they would like to help with Sword in some manner and both of them have not received any answer about how they could help. To me, people willing to help need to be put to work! :) How do we need to treat people that are new and willing to help? Should we send a little bit of a questionnaire like what are their coding abilities, and talents that will be an aid to our project and then plug them in? What are other peoples ideas, I was going to just send this to Troy but thought maybe other people would have some ideas also! So lets start throwing those ideas around! Your Brother, Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 17 12:22:37 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 12:22:37 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] Getting willing people to work! In-Reply-To: <003801c08044$62da9ec0$9a8e2d3f@family> Message-ID: On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Jonathan Hughes wrote: > I hope that everyone at least got to take a little break on Martin > Luther King, Jr. Day! It's not celebrated here in old England. > ... I have sitting here in my mail folders two e-mails > from people that have openly stated on the sword-devel mailinglist they > would like to help with Sword in some manner and both of them have not > received any answer about how they could help. To me, people willing to help > need to be put to work! :) How do we need to treat people that are new and > willing to help? Should we send a little bit of a questionnaire like what > are their coding abilities, and talents that will be an aid to our project > and then plug them in? What are other peoples ideas, I was going to just > send this to Troy but thought maybe other people would have some ideas also! > So lets start throwing those ideas around! I recall that at least one of the recent volunteers said they were not a programmer. However, everyone can be a tester. Problems need to be reported. Whether they are functional problems causing program crashes or idiocyncracies of the interface(s) all need to be reported. They'll not get fixed. Documentation needs reviewing, split infinitives need repairing, spelling misteaks corrected, better explanations written. Modules need reviewing (but as was pointed out recently not everyone involved knows Vietnamese). Long time ago Prof Peter Brown suggested that test installations should be made by novices wilst the program author was on holiday. This tested the installation instructions and the ease of installation. For details you can read "Writing Interactive Compilers and Interpreters ". For an example of how to write good technical explanations read the same book. He suggests that proram authors should give a beer to the first person who finds a particular bug. (Many commerical software producers would have to buy a brewery.) That it's now over the age of maturity, originally in 1979, and hasn't been better nor sadly the lessons learnt means that there's a long way to go. (With many more breweries being required than in 1979.) Brown also presents the 14 deadly sins of program writing, which is a humourous compendium of typical programmer's mistakes. How's about collating a regression test suite? Something that a non-programming volunteer could do. Running QA tests on new releases. Again something that a non-techncial volunteer could do. Writing, reviewing, editing documentation. The tasks are legion. Just needs someone to volunteer to compile the list. Note that many of the things I've brainstormed are not one-offs but are necessary and vital aspects of the project. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 17 14:45:39 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 07:45:39 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Getting willing people to work! In-Reply-To: <003801c08044$62da9ec0$9a8e2d3f@family> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010117073915.00a97250@mail.dancris.com> At 09:13 PM 1/16/2001 -0800, Jonathan Hughes wrote: > How do we need to treat people that are new and >willing to help? Should we send a little bit of a questionnaire like what >are their coding abilities, and talents that will be an aid to our project >and then plug them in? What are other peoples ideas, I was going to just >send this to Troy but thought maybe other people would have some ideas also! >So lets start throwing those ideas around! Along with abilities, the amount of time and the duration they are willing to work on a project is important. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 18 21:50:11 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Palumbo, William) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 13:50:11 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Getting willing people to work! Message-ID: <824EAE80328AD311B2590090276267820157F584@INFOSERVER> I would have to agree with Trevor. Anyone can be a tester. It would help if we had more direction. A test script, task list, etc. Something a bit more comprehensive than we currently have. Even if a dozen programmers landed on our doorstep tomorrow, what would they do? What is priority? Where is the greatest need, etc. Essentially we just need some solid project management. William > -----Original Message----- > From: Trevor Jenkins [mailto:trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 4:23 AM > To: sword-devel@crosswire.org > Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Getting willing people to work! > > > On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Jonathan Hughes wrote: > > > I hope that everyone at least got to take a little > break on Martin > > Luther King, Jr. Day! > > It's not celebrated here in old England. > > > ... I have sitting here in my mail folders two e-mails > > from people that have openly stated on the sword-devel > mailinglist they > > would like to help with Sword in some manner and both of > them have not > > received any answer about how they could help. To me, > people willing to help > > need to be put to work! :) How do we need to treat people > that are new and > > willing to help? Should we send a little bit of a > questionnaire like what > > are their coding abilities, and talents that will be an aid > to our project > > and then plug them in? What are other peoples ideas, I was > going to just > > send this to Troy but thought maybe other people would have > some ideas also! > > So lets start throwing those ideas around! > > I recall that at least one of the recent volunteers said they > were not a > programmer. However, everyone can be a tester. Problems need to be > reported. Whether they are functional problems causing > program crashes or > idiocyncracies of the interface(s) all need to be reported. > They'll not > get fixed. Documentation needs reviewing, split infinitives need > repairing, spelling misteaks corrected, better explanations > written. Modules need reviewing (but as was pointed out recently not > everyone involved knows Vietnamese). > > Long time ago Prof Peter Brown suggested that test > installations should be > made by novices wilst the program author was on holiday. This > tested the > installation instructions and the ease of installation. For > details you > can read "Writing Interactive Compilers and Interpreters ". > For an example > of how to write good technical explanations read the same book. He > suggests that proram authors should give a beer to the first > person who > finds a particular bug. (Many commerical software producers > would have to > buy a brewery.) That it's now over the age of maturity, originally in > 1979, and hasn't been better nor sadly the lessons learnt means that > there's a long way to go. (With many more breweries being > required than in > 1979.) Brown also presents the 14 deadly sins of program > writing, which is > a humourous compendium of typical programmer's mistakes. > > How's about collating a regression test suite? Something that a > non-programming volunteer could do. Running QA tests on new > releases. Again something that a non-techncial volunteer could > do. Writing, reviewing, editing documentation. The tasks are > legion. Just > needs someone to volunteer to compile the list. Note that many of the > things I've brainstormed are not one-offs but are necessary and vital > aspects of the project. > > Regards, Trevor > > British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a > living language. > Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British > government now! > > -- > > <>< Re: deemed! > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 18 20:52:27 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 21:52:27 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword CD Message-ID: <01011821522700.14014@joachim> Hi Troy! I updated the Sword CD a little bit (new KDE 2.01 sources in GOODIES/misc.linux, removed old KDE-1.91 sources, uploaded current BibleTime 0.25 and 0.31 binary and source packages, removed /sword-1.51/ and replaced it by /sword-1.51a/), removed bibletime-0.31pre from the BETA directory). I tried to get gnomesword, but I can't find a program on the server to get file using the http protocoll. Is there any? I hope it's okay for you that I made changes on the CD, that's why I'm sending this eMail. -- Joachim BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 20 05:15:50 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Robyn Manning) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 15:45:50 +1030 Subject: [sword-devel] hello? Message-ID: <01012015455000.01115@kanga> Hi all Is someone going to reply to my previous message? Robyn From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 20 07:03:25 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 23:03:25 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] hello? References: <01012015455000.01115@kanga> Message-ID: <001901c082af$1cbfe680$6a8a2d3f@family> Robyn, I am very, very sorry Robyn, that no one replied, it is not because we don't care but that right now we do not have the infrastructure setup yet to really get volunteers into positions. I am hoping in the future to have the time to head up the volunteer coordination. We are talking about redesigning the Sword Project web page, is that in your area of expertise? Could you please answer the following questions to help me better understand where you can help out with the Sword Project: Your Name: Your primary e-mail address (one that you check frequently): Your Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help the Sword Project, the years of experience and in your opinion our level of competency and examples of your work: i.e. HTML programming, 2 years, Intermediate, http://www.whatever.com/whatever/ Your non-Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help the Sword Project (editing, proofreading, writing, etc.): Approximate number of hours a week you could work on projects for Sword: Any other information that would help us place you in a place that you will enjoy and do a good job in: I hope this is not too much trouble but it will help out a great deal! Thank you so much for your willingness to help! You can send the answers directly to my e-mail: jhughes@crosswire.org In Christ, Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 20 07:07:39 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 23:07:39 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Another Newbie....... References: <015d01c07d63$fcd314a0$f1c8fea9@laptop> Message-ID: <002401c082af$aef42f20$6a8a2d3f@family> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C0826C.9ED1C3C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bill, Thank you for your willingness to serve and help the Sword Project = could you answer the following questions to help me understand where you = could help in the project: Your Name: Your Birthday (only the month and day if you don't want to say how old = you are, I want to be able to say happy birthday when it is your = "special" day! :) ): Your primary e-mail address (one that you check frequently): Your Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help the = Sword Project, the years of experience and in your opinion our level of = competency and examples of your work: i.e. HTML programming, 2 years, Intermediate, http://www.whatever.com/whatever/ Your non-Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help = the Sword Project (editing, proofreading, writing, etc.): Approximate number of hours a week you could work on projects for Sword: Any other information that would help us place you in a place that you = will enjoy and do a good job in: Thanks for taking the time to do this! You can send your response = directly to me: jhughes@crosswire.org In Christ, Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C0826C.9ED1C3C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bill,
 
    Thank you for your willingness to = serve and=20 help the Sword Project could you answer the following questions to help = me=20 understand where you could help in the project:
 
Your Name:
Your Birthday (only the month and day if you don't = want to say=20 how old you are, I want to be able to say happy birthday when it is your = "special" day! :) ):

Your primary e-mail address (one that you = check=20 frequently):

Your Technical abilities that you would be willing = to use to=20 help the Sword
Project, the years of experience and in your opinion = our level=20 of competency
and examples of your work:
i.e. HTML programming, 2 = years,=20 Intermediate,
http://www.whatever.com/whatev= er/

Your=20 non-Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help = the
Sword=20 Project (editing, proofreading, writing, etc.):

Approximate = number of=20 hours a week you could work on projects for Sword:

Any other = information=20 that would help us place you in a place that you will
enjoy and do a = good job=20 in:
 
Thanks for taking the time to do this! You can send = your=20 response directly to me: jhughes@crosswire.org
 
In Christ,
Jonathan
jhughes@crosswire.org ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C0826C.9ED1C3C0-- From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 21 13:23:15 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Leon Brooks) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 21:23:15 +0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword CD References: <01011821522700.14014@joachim> Message-ID: <3A6AE2C3.5010009@brooks.fdns.net> Joachim Ansorg wrote: > Hi Troy! > > I updated the Sword CD a little bit (new KDE 2.01 sources in > GOODIES/misc.linux, removed old KDE-1.91 sources, uploaded current BibleTime > 0.25 and 0.31 binary and source packages, removed /sword-1.51/ and replaced > it by /sword-1.51a/), removed bibletime-0.31pre from the BETA directory). > > I tried to get gnomesword, but I can't find a program on the server to get > file using the http protocoll. Is there any? Try PUTting stuff, also; a common Unix program for fetching things (HTTP and FTP) is wget. To fetch a single file, use: wget http://website.name/path/to/file To fetch a whole directory tree: wget -r http://website.name/path/to/top/directory If there is no wget installed, you can use lynx like this: lynx -dump http://website.name/path/to/file >file To move a directory tree, archive it up at the source end, fetch it as above, and upack it on the target end. If you are using SecureShell to access the server, you can try: scp login@source:/path/to/file login@target: (use scp -r to take a whole directory tree). This has the added advantage of exposing neither content nor passwords during the transfer. If you are sending stuff from a Windows (hawk, spit) workstation to a Unix server, I use and recommend pscp.exe from the PuTTY website (search for that on google.com) at the Windows end. -- The man who doesn't read great books has no advantage over the man who can't read them. -- Mark Twain From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 00:20:54 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:20:54 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management Message-ID: <3A6B7CE6.167B8490@crosswire.org> Jonathan and others, Thanks again for your commitment and involvement with the project... > Hey, how are you doing? I hope everything is ok, I have not seen you > post things on the developers mailinglist in a long time, hope you are just > taking a well deserved vacation! :) Well, not exactly. I've been designing and leading the group developing the XML repository for GE and the first project to use the repository went online this week (3 months before our production deadline, which means we're feveroushly trying to optimize and debug code that we thought we'd have another few months to work on). My apologies for keeping up with sword. > I would like to ask you two things, about > organizing volunteers and the overall project management: > > 1. I am the kind of person that respects authority greatly and will not do > anything that undermines someone else's authority or areas under their > authority, so I would like to ask if it is ok with you that I do somethings > to organize volunteers and the overall project management, including > figuring out exactly what needs to be done, getting people to do some task > lists, documentation, and managing the volunteers and where they are > working, etc. This will all be of course with the advice and contribution of > the developers on the developers mailinglist, and you. But I see this needed > to sorely be done. I agree that we need some organization. Typically, though, there is someone who really has a desire to work on a particular area of the project (e.g. modules -Chris; KDE frontend -Joachim; Copyright stuff -you!; GNOME frontend- Terry; and so many others) and they lead their individual efforts. Maybe a bulletin board type of website for volunteers to go, where they might see who's doing what and who needs help... What do you think? I could help with a set of JSPs that write to our server's database where project leads could post project status and direction, or even actual tasks. > 2. Is it possible to setup a mailinglist to communicate and collaborate on > the new website design for Sword? I know you had concerns that you want the > website to be something that you are comfortable with the layout, design, > and the ability for someone to maintain it when the person doing it now has > to move on. I feel the best way to do this is setting up a mailinglist where > everyone can chat about it and start working out some of the details and > start coding the site all together as a community, including your input and > advice. This is apposed to people spending all the time to make an example > only for it to be rejected, or nothing done with it (as is what is happening > now), we need to develop it as a community. I have contacted the webmaster > of www.kde.org and asked him for some advice about redesigning an open > source projects website. I can share with you these ideas if you would like? What do you and everyone think about using our news server for this list? We had thought about moving the mailing list over to a news server sometime back, and had mixed sentiments. It would give us a great test to see how people like the news server paradigm. Thoughts? From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 00:26:45 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:26:45 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] CD image Message-ID: <3A6B7E45.866083EF@crosswire.org> New CD's are planning on being cut Tuesday. Please have all your updates in the ISO by Monday eve. Thanks! -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 06:03:08 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 23:03:08 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management In-Reply-To: <3A6B7CE6.167B8490@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010121223546.00aa71a0@mail.dancris.com> At 05:20 PM 1/21/2001 -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > Maybe a bulletin board type of website for >volunteers to go, where they might see who's doing what and who needs >help... What do you think? I could help with a set of JSPs that write >to our server's database where project leads could post project status >and direction, or even actual tasks. Having a place to see who is doing what and what help they could use would be nice. If the project leads could post info on what a person should look at; API, task specifications, sample files, and sections of code, so one is acquainted with the task, that would probably be useful. > > I have contacted the webmaster > > of www.kde.org and asked him for some advice about redesigning an open > > source projects website. I can share with you these ideas if you would > like? > >What do you and everyone think about using our news server for this >list? We had thought about moving the mailing list over to a news >server sometime back, and had mixed sentiments. It would give us a >great test to see how people like the news server paradigm. Thoughts? I don't use my news reader much. I like getting new posts as email. But, I do like going to a site and being able to search and view an archive of discussions with threads. If you can set up the news server to send new posts as email that would be great. I prefer each new post as a separate email and not a days worth as one digest. But if you can do both, you will make more people happy. I think egroups does all these things. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 07:21:33 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Robyn Manning) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:51:33 +1030 Subject: [sword-devel] hello? In-Reply-To: <001901c082af$1cbfe680$6a8a2d3f@family> References: <01012015455000.01115@kanga> <001901c082af$1cbfe680$6a8a2d3f@family> Message-ID: <01012217513300.01113@kanga> Hi Jonathan, Thanks for the reply, My name is Robyn Manning, birthday 6th April, 1966 and my email address is robynman@dove.net.au, my website is at http://www.robynman.mtx.net (due for upgrade shortly). I'm not a programmer. I'm a technician and at the moment I'm mainly teaching beginners courses in Microsoft and hopefully Linux. I can help with all the non technical stuff. Organising and writing documentation, proofreading etc. I can put about 5 hours a week into the project. In Christ Robyn On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 17:33, you wrote: > Robyn, > > I am very, very sorry Robyn, that no one replied, it is not because we > don't care but that right now we do not have the infrastructure setup yet > to really get volunteers into positions. I am hoping in the future to have > the time to head up the volunteer coordination. We are talking about > redesigning the Sword Project web page, is that in your area of expertise? > Could you please answer the following questions to help me better > understand where you can help out with the Sword Project: > > Your Name: > > Your primary e-mail address (one that you check frequently): > > Your Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help the Sword > Project, the years of experience and in your opinion our level of > competency and examples of your work: > i.e. HTML programming, 2 years, Intermediate, > http://www.whatever.com/whatever/ > > Your non-Technical abilities that you would be willing to use to help the > Sword Project (editing, proofreading, writing, etc.): > > Approximate number of hours a week you could work on projects for Sword: > > Any other information that would help us place you in a place that you will > enjoy and do a good job in: > > > I hope this is not too much trouble but it will help out a great deal! > Thank you so much for your willingness to help! You can send the answers > directly to my e-mail: jhughes@crosswire.org > > In Christ, > Jonathan > jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 09:25:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 01:25:42 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] new/updated modules In-Reply-To: <01012217513300.01113@kanga> Message-ID: I uploaded some new modules to the site as well as updating those texts Nathan pointed out as corrupt with corrected versions. Here's the rundown, with module names in parentheses: Updated texts: Vietnamese (Viet) Turkish NT (Turkish) Romanian Cornilescu (RomCor) Hungarian Karoli (HunKar) 1917 JPS Tanakh (JPS) New texts: The Emphatic Diaglott (Diaglott) Montgomery New Testament (Montgomery) The Twentieth Century New Testament (Twenty) The Emphasized Bible by J. B. Rotherham (Rotherham) All are in the public domain or freely distributable. Enjoy. --Chris Little From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 12:20:00 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:20:00 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management References: <3A6B7CE6.167B8490@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <3A6C2570.D92B5093@bigfoot.com> "Troy A. Griffitts" wrote: > ... > Maybe a bulletin board type of website for > volunteers to go, where they might see who's doing what and who needs > help... What do you think? Haven't we already got that on SourceForge? > ... > What do you and everyone think about using our news server for this > list? We had thought about moving the mailing list over to a news > server sometime back, and had mixed sentiments. It would give us a > great test to see how people like the news server paradigm. Thoughts? Most people these days use a news-capable email client, so it shouldn't be a problem. I would suggest adding a crosswire.www or something like that for the requested forum for working on the web page, and also a crosswire.software.reference (moderated), for filing reference material like pseudo-FAQs. We do seem to get the same questions repeated fairly frequently. Maybe a news/email cross-posting gateway would be a good idea. Then people who like news can read it there, and people who like email can get it that way. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear P.S. I use a news proxy on my Linux box called leafnode , and it is pretty cool. It is as easy to configure as a news client, and gives me LAN-speed access to my newsgroups. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 13:33:26 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 13:33:26 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management In-Reply-To: <3A6C2570.D92B5093@bigfoot.com> Message-ID: <3A6C36A6.24690.19FA6910@localhost> On 22 Jan 2001, at 22:20, Paul Gear sent forth the message: > Maybe a news/email cross-posting gateway would be a good idea. Then > people who like news can read it there, and people who like email can > get it that way. That would be great :) For whoever is dealing with that, here's a Mini Howto http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/mini/Mail2News.html Regards, Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 19 02:11:37 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 19:11:37 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword CD References: <01011821522700.14014@joachim> Message-ID: <3A67A259.D10FF9FB@crosswire.org> Joachim, Your timing is PERFECT! I was just about to request everyone to update so that I might run a new batch. We're low on CDs over here again. THANK YOU SO MUCH! I'll keep ya posted when I get my stuff in and give ya a final date so that you'll have a chance to do anything else you want... -Troy. Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > Hi Troy! > > I updated the Sword CD a little bit (new KDE 2.01 sources in > GOODIES/misc.linux, removed old KDE-1.91 sources, uploaded current BibleTime > 0.25 and 0.31 binary and source packages, removed /sword-1.51/ and replaced > it by /sword-1.51a/), removed bibletime-0.31pre from the BETA directory). > > I tried to get gnomesword, but I can't find a program on the server to get > file using the http protocoll. Is there any? > > I hope it's okay for you that I made changes on the CD, that's why I'm > sending this eMail. > > -- Joachim > BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de > BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 21 22:27:44 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 15:27:44 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management References: <002401c08378$b9946c00$348a2d3f@family> Message-ID: <3A6B6260.F5B3DCDC@crosswire.org> Jonathan and others, Thanks again for your commitment and involvement with the project... > Hey, how are you doing? I hope everything is ok, I have not seen you > post things on the developers mailinglist in a long time, hope you are just > taking a well deserved vacation! :) Well, not exactly. I've been designing and leading the group developing the XML repository for GE and the first project to use the repository went online this week (3 months before our production deadline, which means we're feveroushly trying to optimize and debug code that we thought we'd have another few months to work on). My apologies for keeping up with sword. > I would like to ask you two things, about > organizing volunteers and the overall project management: > > 1. I am the kind of person that respects authority greatly and will not do > anything that undermines someone else's authority or areas under their > authority, so I would like to ask if it is ok with you that I do somethings > to organize volunteers and the overall project management, including > figuring out exactly what needs to be done, getting people to do some task > lists, documentation, and managing the volunteers and where they are > working, etc. This will all be of course with the advice and contribution of > the developers on the developers mailinglist, and you. But I see this needed > to sorely be done. I agree that we need some organization. Typically, though, there is someone who really has a desire to work on a particular area of the project (e.g. modules -Chris; KDE frontend -Joachim; Copyright stuff -you!; GNOME frontend- Terry; and so many others) and they lead their individual efforts. Maybe a bulletin board type of website for volunteers to go, where they might see who's doing what and who needs help... What do you think? I could help with a set of JSPs that write to our server's database where project leads could post project status and direction, or even actual tasks. > 2. Is it possible to setup a mailinglist to communicate and collaborate on > the new website design for Sword? I know you had concerns that you want the > website to be something that you are comfortable with the layout, design, > and the ability for someone to maintain it when the person doing it now has > to move on. I feel the best way to do this is setting up a mailinglist where > everyone can chat about it and start working out some of the details and > start coding the site all together as a community, including your input and > advice. This is apposed to people spending all the time to make an example > only for it to be rejected, or nothing done with it (as is what is happening > now), we need to develop it as a community. I have contacted the webmaster > of www.kde.org and asked him for some advice about redesigning an open > source projects website. I can share with you these ideas if you would like? What do you and everyone think about using our news server for this list? We had thought about moving the mailing list over to a news server sometime back, and had mixed sentiments. It would give us a great test to see how people like the news server paradigm. Thoughts? From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 21 23:42:35 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 16:42:35 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] CD image Message-ID: <3A6B73EB.4BF170B7@crosswire.org> New CD's are planning on being cut Tuesday. Please have all your updates in the ISO by Monday eve. Thanks! -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 00:05:29 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:05:29 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] sendmail troubles Message-ID: <3A6B7949.560289D0@crosswire.org> Having troubles with sendmail. Please excuse this test message to the list. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 22 17:01:38 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 18:01:38 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] New Sword CD Message-ID: <01012218013800.00713@joachim> Hi! Troy, I put some stuff of the alpha pages into BETA/win/ These are: vpl2mod.exe, mod2vpl.exe, sword-1.51a.exe, locales.zip and prn2sword.exe. I hope this is OK and the right directory, if you dislike it please remove them. I also updates some HOWTO/* files, some READMEs etc. I also updates the GnomeSword sources to the newest release. I think we should also update the binary in the root of the CD, but I don't have one. Could you do it, please? Thank you Troy! Joachim -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 23 03:13:28 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:13:28 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: Volunteer and Project Management References: <3A6C36A6.24690.19FA6910@localhost> Message-ID: <003501c084ea$7613d9c0$b20c8eac@family> Dear Everyone, I understand that there are people that head up each section, of the Sword project, like Joachim, Terry, etc. But I also see a need for someone that will push something's through that each subproject needs to be doing, this includes documentation, and volunteer coordinating. This way some of the daunting tasks of project management can be given to someone else and the leaders can focus on specifically developing and directing the volunteers under them. Does this make sense? I will put up at http://www.crosswire.org/sword/copyright/personal/swordprojectmanage.shtml some of my ideas for the hierarchy of project management, what documentation needs to be seen, and the areas I see the new redesigned Sword website needs to have. Please give me corrects, thoughts, etc. on this plan. I just want to see, one or more positions and people created to help all projects work together and someone to push for documentation and volunteer coordination, so we can get people in here, to work on things and get stuff done! Then maybe Joachim will not be the only one developing BibleTime, the Sword Project can have a new website, that can be updated easily, and will provide the users with more documentation on installation, and also documentation for developers on how to get started and creating modules (please this! then we will not have as many posts on the sword-support mailing list! :) ) Thanks for the time you will take to check everything out. I welcome all feedback!! In Christ, Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 23 10:34:44 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:34:44 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] autoconf support Message-ID: <3A6D5E44.31702.3BA1637@localhost> As promised, here is a patch that provides autoconf support for sword (as well as Debian package building support). It is for 1.5.1a http://homepage.ntlworld.com/danglassey/sword_1.5.1a-4.diff.gz I haven't tried applying it to CVS, but it ought to work without too many modifications. Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 23 10:48:44 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 03:48:44 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] New Sword CD References: <01012218013800.00713@joachim> Message-ID: <3A6D618C.C0A0C4CE@crosswire.org> I'm gonna give it a few more days as others have expressed interest in updating things. And this morning I got caught up again with CD orders. We're good thru December with the last of what I had. It worked out just right, so I think a few days won't hurt. -Troy. Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > Hi! > > Troy, I put some stuff of the alpha pages into BETA/win/ > > These are: > > vpl2mod.exe, mod2vpl.exe, sword-1.51a.exe, locales.zip and prn2sword.exe. > > I hope this is OK and the right directory, if you dislike it please remove > them. > > I also updates some HOWTO/* files, some READMEs etc. > I also updates the GnomeSword sources to the newest release. > > I think we should also update the binary in the root of the CD, but I don't > have one. Could you do it, please? > > Thank you Troy! > > Joachim > -- > Joachim Ansorg > BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de > BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 24 05:15:08 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 22:15:08 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] New Sword CD References: <01012218013800.00713@joachim> Message-ID: <3A6E64DC.D18517E6@crosswire.org> Joachim Ansorg wrote: > I also updates the GnomeSword sources to the newest release. > > I think we should also update the binary in the root of the CD, but I don't > have one. Could you do it, please? done. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 24 20:56:04 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:56:04 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] collaboration Message-ID: <3A6F4164.D8F45B99@crosswire.org> In an effort to better expand collaboration, I've started a #sword channel on irc.openprojects.net Chris, you still have any of those cool bots available? :) Please join if you would like to chat. -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 01:04:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 17:04:42 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] collaboration In-Reply-To: <3A6F4164.D8F45B99@crosswire.org> Message-ID: > In an effort to better expand collaboration, I've started a #sword > channel on irc.openprojects.net Good idea. :) > Chris, you still have any of those cool bots available? :) I do. Could I run it on crosswire? My ISP is pro-server but anti-IRC-bot. Since they're mostly concerned with porn/warez trading bots, I doubt they're really notice or mind, but I'm betting crosswire.org is a lot more stable than my box at home. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 01:55:48 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 18:55:48 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] collaboration References: Message-ID: <3A6F87A4.57B4B7D8@crosswire.org> Chris Little wrote: > I do. Could I run it on crosswire? My ISP is pro-server but anti-IRC-bot. > Since they're mostly concerned with porn/warez trading bots, I doubt they're > really notice or mind, but I'm betting crosswire.org is a lot more stable > than my box at home. Go for it. Let me know if you need any other rights. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 24 23:53:30 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:53:30 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] ISO updates Message-ID: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> Hello sword-devel, I have bibletime, gnomesword and sword1.5.1a compiled and in the packages directory on the cd for the new iso. Gnomesword and bibletime are the latest versions available. These were compiled fr Mandrake 7.2. Also Mandrake 7.2 does not require the extra helixcode packages for gnomesword to work. This time i put the srpm's in there to in case something happens to my hard drive. That's the only reason that I havn't updates the module rpm's yet because I lost all the spec files and srpms for them. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 22:22:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:22:46 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] ISO updates In-Reply-To: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> References: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> Message-ID: <01012523224603.04237@joachim> Hi Brook! > Hello sword-devel, > > I have bibletime, gnomesword and sword1.5.1a compiled and in the > packages directory on the cd for the new iso. Gnomesword and > bibletime are the latest versions available. These were compiled fr > Mandrake 7.2. I also put an RPM for Mandrake 7.2 there some days ago. I think we should ship both because yours is for i686, or am I wrong here? > Also Mandrake 7.2 does not require the extra helixcode packages for > gnomesword to work. This time i put the srpm's in there to in case > something happens to my hard drive. That's the only reason that I > havn't updates the module rpm's yet because I lost all the spec > files and srpms for them. -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 22:25:49 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:25:49 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword CD Message-ID: <01012523254904.04237@joachim> Hi Troy! Is it possible to wait until Sunday with the last date of ISO-updates? Matthias (my brother) is not at home at the moment (he's doing his military service), but until Sunday we can probably upload some updates to the MAK (maybe) and GerLut1545 modules. Is it ok? -- Joachim Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 22:46:25 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 14:46:25 -0800 Subject: Re[2]: [sword-devel] ISO updates In-Reply-To: <01012523224603.04237@joachim> References: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> <01012523224603.04237@joachim> Message-ID: <284661961.20010125144625@webmedic.net> Hello Joachim, No it is for i686 my box compiles that way by default and I fugured I would just leave it that way. Thursday, January 25, 2001, 2:22:46 PM, you wrote: Joachim Ansorg> Hi Brook! >> Hello sword-devel, >> >> I have bibletime, gnomesword and sword1.5.1a compiled and in the >> packages directory on the cd for the new iso. Gnomesword and >> bibletime are the latest versions available. These were compiled fr >> Mandrake 7.2. Joachim Ansorg> I also put an RPM for Mandrake 7.2 there some days ago. Joachim Ansorg> I think we should ship both because yours is for i686, or am I wrong here? >> Also Mandrake 7.2 does not require the extra helixcode packages for >> gnomesword to work. This time i put the srpm's in there to in case >> something happens to my hard drive. That's the only reason that I >> havn't updates the module rpm's yet because I lost all the spec >> files and srpms for them. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 22:45:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:45:46 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] ISO updates In-Reply-To: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> References: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> Message-ID: <01012523454600.18130@joachim> Hi Brook (again)! Do you have Caldera 2.4? Is is possible that you create an RPM for this distribution of BibleTime 0.25 ? Would be great! --Joachim > Hello sword-devel, > > I have bibletime, gnomesword and sword1.5.1a compiled and in the > packages directory on the cd for the new iso. Gnomesword and > bibletime are the latest versions available. These were compiled fr > Mandrake 7.2. > > Also Mandrake 7.2 does not require the extra helixcode packages for > gnomesword to work. This time i put the srpm's in there to in case > something happens to my hard drive. That's the only reason that I > havn't updates the module rpm's yet because I lost all the spec > files and srpms for them. -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 22:46:44 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:46:44 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Irenaeus Message-ID: <01012523464401.18130@joachim> Hi! Shouldn't Irenaeus put on the CD? I think we should. If Brook doesn't already have some RPMS of Irenaeus I'll try to create one. -- Joachim Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 23:02:10 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:02:10 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Iso updates Message-ID: <1835607226.20010125150210@webmedic.net> Hello Sword, Almost forgot I also downloaded the debs for sword, bibletime and gnomesword from the packagers website and put them in the cd forthe new iso. If I have time this after noon I'll try to compile the curses version of the front end for sword. If it turns out I'll put it either in the packages or the beta section on the cd. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 23:02:35 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:02:35 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Irenaeus In-Reply-To: <01012523464401.18130@joachim> References: <01012523464401.18130@joachim> Message-ID: <45632745.20010125150235@webmedic.net> Hello Joachim, I'll probably try to get on it this afternoon. Thursday, January 25, 2001, 2:46:44 PM, you wrote: Joachim Ansorg> Hi! Joachim Ansorg> Shouldn't Irenaeus put on the CD? Joachim Ansorg> I think we should. Joachim Ansorg> If Brook doesn't already have some RPMS of Irenaeus I'll try to create one. Joachim Ansorg> -- Joachim Joachim Ansorg> Joachim Ansorg Joachim Ansorg> BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de Joachim Ansorg> BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Thu Jan 25 23:04:21 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:04:21 -0800 Subject: Re[2]: [sword-devel] ISO updates In-Reply-To: <01012523454600.18130@joachim> References: <1483824092.20010124155330@webmedic.net> <01012523454600.18130@joachim> Message-ID: <1365738406.20010125150421@webmedic.net> Hello Joachim, Yes I have caldera 2.4. It's not instaled right now but it would only take maybe an hour to install it and then i could compile some packages. Thursday, January 25, 2001, 2:45:46 PM, you wrote: Joachim Ansorg> Hi Brook (again)! Joachim Ansorg> Do you have Caldera 2.4? Joachim Ansorg> Is is possible that you create an RPM for this distribution of BibleTime 0.25 Joachim Ansorg> ? Joachim Ansorg> Would be great! Joachim Ansorg> --Joachim >> Hello sword-devel, >> >> I have bibletime, gnomesword and sword1.5.1a compiled and in the >> packages directory on the cd for the new iso. Gnomesword and >> bibletime are the latest versions available. These were compiled fr >> Mandrake 7.2. >> >> Also Mandrake 7.2 does not require the extra helixcode packages for >> gnomesword to work. This time i put the srpm's in there to in case >> something happens to my hard drive. That's the only reason that I >> havn't updates the module rpm's yet because I lost all the spec >> files and srpms for them. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 26 02:01:50 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:01:50 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyright website) References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> Message-ID: <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> [Sorry this is untimely, but i think it's an important issue.] BJW7TOAEM@aol.com wrote: > ... > I set up the web site so that we could start contacting copyright holders of > the modules for Sword that are locked, this way we could unlock them for all > of the public to use. > ... > Comments? Questions? Thanks for your time! Let me clarify this: are you wanting to get the modules released by the copyright holder for free, unencrypted distribution? I've been doing a lot of thinking about this issue, and you can criticise me for my lack of faith later, but (assuming i am understanding the idea rightly) i don't think this will happen. _Ever_. It would be great if it did, but i don't think it's going to. Now if my understanding above is not right, then what you are talking about is a way to issue unlock codes so that people can use the locked texts. Now before we can expect to get publishers to allow us to use their texts, we need to be able to provide them with assurances that their texts are protected using a well-proven mechanism. I started thinking about how we might achieve such a thing in the Sword project, and i knew that other people must have been thinking about these things, so i went looking at the Open eBook site , because i knew that would be a main hurdle that those guys would be interested in overcoming. This led me to a company called ContentGuard , and thence to the site for XrML, eXtensible Rights Markup Language, an XML specification for DRM (Digital Rights Management), which means describing and enforcing the rights of publishers, distributors, and consumers of digital content. Check it out at . On the XrML site, i came across what i consider a truly scary document: . This is an academic white paper written by a couple of guys (one of them a computer scientist, and the other a patent attorney specialising in intellectual property) in Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center back in 1997. In this article the authors represent publishing as a pendulum that can swing between the rights of publishers and the rights of consumers. Fundamentally, what they are saying is that back in the good old days of print media, there was a reasonable balance between the needs and rights of publishers and the needs and rights of consumers. Publishers had copyright to protect other people from ripping off their works for commercial gain, but consumers had a wide range of rights that fall under 'fair use', including copying portions of a work for personal or academic purposes, and access to technologies (e.g. photocopying) that allowed them to do this copying without overly concerning the publishers. They then contend that the digital revolution has swung the pendulum too far towards the rights of consumers, away from the publishers (due to the fact that perfect copies can be made of digital content), and that because of this, traditional publishers are reluctant to get into the digital publishing market. They claim what is needed is a standard for digital publishing that will enable publishers to enter the market with confidence that they are not going to be victimised by the consumer. The actual details of this digital standard are largely irrelevant, but in a nutshell, it involves creating 'trusted systems' - certified software that can be trusted to handle digital content in accordance with the rules given for its use by the publisher. What this boils down to in practical terms is that the software would be able to, for example, deny people the right to copy more than a certain number of pages or Kb of a work (without paying for a license), store and print it in a manner that makes it hard to copy in electronic and printed form (encrypted, with digital and printable watermarks), limit us to viewing the first chapter of a downloaded book until we've paid for more, etc. I believe this paper presents a view of digital publishing that, first, reflects the broad trends of the majority of commercial publishers (including those who publish Christian content), and second, cuts at the very core of what CrossWire is trying to do (which is make more content more available). (You can find more documents reflecting this viewpoint at .) Personally, i don't want to be part of a world where people are so close-fisted with their content that i have to pay them to even make a copy for reference purposes (like i might take a copy of a single page in a book and stick it in my filing cabinet), or have to rent a book that i want to read, and lose access to it when my "lease" runs out. To put this in (Windoze) Bible software terms, i think Online Bible has it right when it comes to content, not Logos. Online Bible are continually building their library of content that, admittedly, is unfamiliar to the commercial consumer (and probably inferior in some parts), but is not shackled by the license agreements of commercial publishing. I think this is something we need to constantly keep in mind. Chris Little wrote: > > > some of our leverage as being a free, non-commercial and OPEN SOURCE > > software package would be taken away. > > I don't think being Open Source is much of a selling point to publishers. Definitely not. Even if they understand it, they are not likely to want it. Neither would i if i was a commercial publisher. (See below for why.) > See Bob Pritchett from Logos' comments in the bible-linux egroups list on > the subject. Generally, they're afraid of someone cracking the software and > stealing their stuff. There's some logic to it, since someone with an > unlocked module could essentially do anything with that module, like print, > publish online, etc. Amusingly, I'd say we still have much stronger > protection than most closed-source, even commercial products. With SWORD, > you definitely have to have a decrypt key for every query. Logos, on the > other hand, just keeps track of which books you have unlocked and stores it > in a file. In other words, nothing is even encrypted, so you can pretty > easily share your unlock cache file or crack the program itself to ignore > the unlock checks. How are those problems not applicable to Sword? Think about this: where do you get the decrypt key that you need for every query? There are two obvious answers to this: store it in a file, or request it from an unlock server. (There are several other, less practical answers than these, like requiring the user to enter it manually each time, but let's ignore them for the time being.) Take the second case: downloading the key in real time from an unlock server. This immediately adds the requirement that the unlock server must be available at the time. That prevents us from being able to provide the ability on most PDAs, as well as being a pain for those people who do not have full-time 'Net access (which is most of the rest of the world, for those of you who have American-class bandwidth). Secondly, if the unlock server is to provide the client with a key, there must be an authentication mechanism for clients. This means that we would have to provide every client with an RSA key or equivalent that could be verified against a database on the unlock server. Now, since we are free software project, everyone can see the code to do this. What is to stop someone writing a program to do the handshake with the unlock server and then store the unlock key on their local computer? Then they can also write a program to decrypt the module locally without ever going to the unlock server. So this makes even the technique of using an unlock server equivalent to storing the keys in a local file. Now let's think about the local file storage issue. If we store the key unencrypted, anyone can write a program to open the module using it. If we decide to encrypt the module key, what do we use as the key for that? Where do we store that key? The whole problem starts again. All of this is rather moot at the moment, as software for unlocking, etc. doesn't even exist for Sword. Presently, anyone can go to the alpha test page, download the encryption keys, and write a program to dump out the raw text. That would be much easier than cracking Logos or sharing your Logos unlock files with your friends. (You have to restart the program each time you switch unlock files, and as far as i know, you can't combine them.) > I think most publishers can be categorized as > Pointy-Haired Bosses, though, so closed-source indicates greater security to > them, even in cases where it shouldn't. *sigh* Closed source _does_ give greater security to publishers. If all other things are equal (i.e. the type of technology, the method of distribution, etc.), closed source is more secure, because it is harder to reverse-engineer software than it is to forward-engineer (compile) it. It doesn't matter how many layers of abstraction you add in, with open source you can write a program that can retrieve the plain text of a module and do what you want with it. There are a few solutions to this: ignore the issue and assume that we will always have free texts and never need an unlocking mechanism (cf. Online Bible), convert Sword to LGPL or an equivalent and write closed software for the locked module management, or convince publishers that it is harder to write software than disassemble software. (There may be more answers.) I think the last of these is an exercise in futility, the first locks us out of the commercial text market for good, and the middle one is a little distasteful from the libertarian programmer point of view, but probably practical. Leon Brooks wrote: > > Chris Little wrote: > > >> some of our leverage as being a free, non-commercial and OPEN SOURCE > >> software package would be taken away. > > > I don't think being Open Source is much of a selling point to publishers. > > No, but it does illustrate that in principle we are not chest-hugging > greedy and paranoid about things. But in most cases, the people whose texts we want to use are. (Maybe that's a bit unfair of me, but not by much.) > ... > The advantage here is not ``open source'' but ``better methods,'' or (in > this case at least) better engineering. I think we're a long way from being able to assert that. It's not like the difference between NT and Linux just yet. Linux has better engineering because there are thousands of pairs of eyes looking at various parts of the OS. We've probably got 5 or 10 pairs. :-P > Really, any work done for Christ should be both free and open source > regardless, caveat that the workers concerned must find a way to sustain > themselves. Many ``Christian'' publishers are worrying too much about > staying in business and not enough about what their business really is. > While there is a definite duty of care involved, if God be for a > publisher, who can be against them? What if the publisher is not Christian? Zondervan is the overused example here - it is owned by Harper Collins, and they are just there to make money, not promote Christian living or values. It just so happens that Christian books (particularly of the conservative Evangelical persuasion) are a very profitable market. > Publishers should have the purity > and effectiveness of the works that they produce first in mind, the > dollars second (and the spread of the gospel zeroeth: it should not so > much be something to be borne in mind as a basic assumption, part of the > personality of the company). I think everyone here agrees with you. > > ... > One profitability method is to use electronic media as a leader back to > traditional media: ``if you like reading this text on line, have you > considered owning an attractively bound printed copy with that > traditional feel, clear print, lasting value and batteryless portable > operation?'' This, I believe, has a limited future. Have a read of the article i've linked above and see how it sits with you. > Either way, the purpose of Christian literature, espcially the Word of > God, should be primarily to get itself read and used. If we can find a > way to make this happen, hopefully commensurate with the profitability > of whatever the publishing companies become, I'm sure God will be > pleased. (-: > It seems to me that at present, there aren't too many viable alternatives to the 'If you like the electronic copy, you'll love the hard copy' marketing method. What "ways to make this happen" are you thinking of? Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear P.S. Quick gripe: Jonathan, Can you turn of HTML on your email messages? It makes them very hard to read. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 26 03:36:32 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 19:36:32 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Iso Update Message-ID: <1667304902.20010125193632@webmedic.net> Hello Sword, I tracked down the Irenaeus rpm's and put them in the beta directory for the cd. I didn't make these rpm's they were made by the author. I don't really like the rpm itself it needs some work but everytime I try to compile it on my system it tells me that I don't have a working compiler. Which is imposible because I just used the compiler to compile bibletime, sword, gnomesword and others. Anyway I included the authors original rpm it runs on my mandrake system but there are some screen refresh problems wich the author is already aware of. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 26 04:45:20 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (sword-devel@crosswire.org) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:45:20 EST Subject: Re[2]: [sword-devel] ISO updates Message-ID: <7a.fae9aa7.27a25ae0@aol.com> --part1_7a.fae9aa7.27a25ae0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Everyone, I am not sure if it would help any, but doesn't sourceforge.net offer compiling farms for all the latest Linux distributions, would it be possible to compile on those for making rpm's and such for distribution? -Jonathan BJW7TOAEM@aol.com --part1_7a.fae9aa7.27a25ae0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Everyone,

      I am not sure if it would help any, but doesn't sourceforge.net offer
compiling farms for all the latest Linux distributions, would it be possible
to compile on those for making rpm's and such for distribution?

-Jonathan
BJW7TOAEM@aol.com --part1_7a.fae9aa7.27a25ae0_boundary-- From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 26 10:13:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:13:42 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Iso updates In-Reply-To: <1835607226.20010125150210@webmedic.net> Message-ID: <3A714DD6.18291.9DF1682@localhost> just one thing I forgot to point out on the site. The debs are for unstable debian _not_ potato (neither kde nor the bits of gnome that gnomesword currently needs are in potato, the current stable release). Daniel On 25 Jan 2001, at 15:02, Brook Humphrey sent forth the message: > Hello Sword, > > Almost forgot I also downloaded the debs for sword, bibletime and > gnomesword from the packagers website and put them in the cd forthe > new iso. > > If I have time this after noon I'll try to compile the > curses version of the front end for sword. If it turns out I'll put > it either in the packages or the beta section on the cd. > > -- > Best regards, > Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net > > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Fri Jan 26 11:21:19 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:21:19 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Iso Update In-Reply-To: <1667304902.20010125193632@webmedic.net> References: <1667304902.20010125193632@webmedic.net> Message-ID: <01012612124200.04606@joachim> Hi! I had the same problems with configure. I compiled with "LDFLAGS="-lz -lstdc++ CPPFLAGS=/path/to/swordir/include/ ./configure" To compile with Sword 1.51a you have to replace in line "Delete()" with "deleteEntry()". Maybe you have to edit configure.in to change the -lcurses part to -lncurses. I hope this helps you! I'm so glad that you have so much experience with RPMS. Without you we would have much more work! Thank you Brook! Joachim > Hello Sword, > > I tracked down the Irenaeus rpm's and put them in the beta directory > for the cd. I didn't make these rpm's they were made by the author. > I don't really like the rpm itself it needs some work but everytime > I try to compile it on my system it tells me that I don't have a > working compiler. Which is imposible because I just used the > compiler to compile bibletime, sword, gnomesword and others. Anyway > I included the authors original rpm it runs on my mandrake system > but there are some screen refresh problems wich the author is > already aware of. -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 27 05:10:15 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 21:10:15 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyright website) References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> Message-ID: <002501c0881f$72ea5f20$6a8a2d3f@family> Paul, I would like to first of all thank you for taking the time, to respond, and in such depth. That really means a lot to me because that is how I will see and understand flaws in my plans and strategy! > BJW7TOAEM@aol.com wrote: > > ... > > I set up the web site so that we could start contacting copyright holders of > > the modules for Sword that are locked, this way we could unlock them for all > > of the public to use. > > ... > > Comments? Questions? Thanks for your time! > > Let me clarify this: are you wanting to get the modules released by the > copyright holder for free, unencrypted distribution? You are exactly correct! I am not sure about the technological side of the modules, but yes my strategy is to have the copyright holders release the moducles for free. Now I am not nieve or stupid and I hope that those will never be ascribed to me (I know you didn't say either!), I understand how the world works and how business works, but I also know how God works, and so that is why I have this as my goal. If we meet with opposition from the publishers, then maybe we will need to modify the strategy to see if we can liscense the modules to be distrupted for a small fee, but I will never give up on trying to get all texts to be distrupted for free. > I've been doing a lot of thinking about this issue, and you can > criticise me for my lack of faith later, but (assuming i am > understanding the idea rightly) i don't think this will happen. > _Ever_. It would be great if it did, but i don't think it's going to. I think it will happen. :) > Now if my understanding above is not right, then what you are talking > about is a way to issue unlock codes so that people can use the locked > texts. Now before we can expect to get publishers to allow us to use > their texts, we need to be able to provide them with assurances that > their texts are protected using a well-proven mechanism. > > I started thinking about how we might achieve such a thing in the Sword > project, and i knew that other people must have been thinking about > these things, so i went looking at the Open eBook site > , because i knew that would be a main hurdle > that those guys would be interested in overcoming. > > This led me to a company called ContentGuard > , and thence to the site for XrML, > eXtensible Rights Markup Language, an XML specification for DRM (Digital > Rights Management), which means describing and enforcing the rights of > publishers, distributors, and consumers of digital content. Check it > out at . > > On the XrML site, i came across what i consider a truly scary document: > . This is an academic > white paper written by a couple of guys (one of them a computer > scientist, and the other a patent attorney specialising in intellectual > property) in Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center back in 1997. In this > article the authors represent publishing as a pendulum that can swing > between the rights of publishers and the rights of consumers. I will check out the links, but like I said before I don't really want to be involved in the technical side of how the modules will be distrupted, I think it would sufice how we do it now with unlock keys, you are right people can just decrypt the modules and spread the text around, but they can do that with Online Bible, and pretty much any other Bible packages, so this should not stop us. But it should be considered. > Fundamentally, what they are saying is that back in the good old days of > print media, there was a reasonable balance between the needs and rights > of publishers and the needs and rights of consumers. Publishers had > copyright to protect other people from ripping off their works for > commercial gain, but consumers had a wide range of rights that fall > under 'fair use', including copying portions of a work for personal or > academic purposes, and access to technologies (e.g. photocopying) that > allowed them to do this copying without overly concerning the > publishers. > > They then contend that the digital revolution has swung the pendulum too > far towards the rights of consumers, away from the publishers (due to > the fact that perfect copies can be made of digital content), and that > because of this, traditional publishers are reluctant to get into the > digital publishing market. They claim what is needed is a standard for > digital publishing that will enable publishers to enter the market with > confidence that they are not going to be victimised by the consumer. > > The actual details of this digital standard are largely irrelevant, but > in a nutshell, it involves creating 'trusted systems' - certified > software that can be trusted to handle digital content in accordance > with the rules given for its use by the publisher. > > What this boils down to in practical terms is that the software would be > able to, for example, deny people the right to copy more than a certain > number of pages or Kb of a work (without paying for a license), store > and print it in a manner that makes it hard to copy in electronic and > printed form (encrypted, with digital and printable watermarks), limit > us to viewing the first chapter of a downloaded book until we've paid > for more, etc. > > I believe this paper presents a view of digital publishing that, first, > reflects the broad trends of the majority of commercial publishers > (including those who publish Christian content), and second, cuts at the > very core of what CrossWire is trying to do (which is make more content > more available). (You can find more documents reflecting this viewpoint > at .) This is very disturbing! I have never liked the idea of Christian publishers, authors, etc, keeping their works just for themselves, there are so many different works that would help Christians, and I wish people could get to them, but all of this politics just doesn't sit well with me. > Personally, i don't want to be part of a world where people are so > close-fisted with their content that i have to pay them to even make a > copy for reference purposes (like i might take a copy of a single page > in a book and stick it in my filing cabinet), or have to rent a book > that i want to read, and lose access to it when my "lease" runs out. > > To put this in (Windoze) Bible software terms, i think Online Bible has > it right when it comes to content, not Logos. Online Bible are > continually building their library of content that, admittedly, is > unfamiliar to the commercial consumer (and probably inferior in some > parts), but is not shackled by the license agreements of commercial > publishing. I think this is something we need to constantly keep in > mind. > > Chris Little wrote: > > > > > some of our leverage as being a free, non-commercial and OPEN SOURCE > > > software package would be taken away. > > > > I don't think being Open Source is much of a selling point to publishers. > > Definitely not. Even if they understand it, they are not likely to want > it. Neither would i if i was a commercial publisher. (See below for > why.) Yea, maybe not the close minded publishers, but some of our texts are from individual people, and it maybe something we can show to them to let them know that we as a political philosophy are commited to a product that will help people, without the barier of fianances, etc. > > See Bob Pritchett from Logos' comments in the bible-linux egroups list on > > the subject. Generally, they're afraid of someone cracking the software and > > stealing their stuff. There's some logic to it, since someone with an > > unlocked module could essentially do anything with that module, like print, > > publish online, etc. Amusingly, I'd say we still have much stronger > > protection than most closed-source, even commercial products. With SWORD, > > you definitely have to have a decrypt key for every query. Logos, on the > > other hand, just keeps track of which books you have unlocked and stores it > > in a file. In other words, nothing is even encrypted, so you can pretty > > easily share your unlock cache file or crack the program itself to ignore > > the unlock checks. > > How are those problems not applicable to Sword? Think about this: where > do you get the decrypt key that you need for every query? There are two > obvious answers to this: store it in a file, or request it from an > unlock server. (There are several other, less practical answers than > these, like requiring the user to enter it manually each time, but let's > ignore them for the time being.) > > Take the second case: downloading the key in real time from an unlock > server. This immediately adds the requirement that the unlock server > must be available at the time. That prevents us from being able to > provide the ability on most PDAs, as well as being a pain for those > people who do not have full-time 'Net access (which is most of the rest > of the world, for those of you who have American-class bandwidth). > > Secondly, if the unlock server is to provide the client with a key, > there must be an authentication mechanism for clients. This means that > we would have to provide every client with an RSA key or equivalent that > could be verified against a database on the unlock server. > > Now, since we are free software project, everyone can see the code to do > this. What is to stop someone writing a program to do the handshake > with the unlock server and then store the unlock key on their local > computer? Then they can also write a program to decrypt the module > locally without ever going to the unlock server. So this makes even the > technique of using an unlock server equivalent to storing the keys in a > local file. > > Now let's think about the local file storage issue. If we store the key > unencrypted, anyone can write a program to open the module using it. If > we decide to encrypt the module key, what do we use as the key for > that? Where do we store that key? The whole problem starts again. > > All of this is rather moot at the moment, as software for unlocking, > etc. doesn't even exist for Sword. Presently, anyone can go to the > alpha test page, download the encryption keys, and write a program to > dump out the raw text. That would be much easier than cracking Logos or > sharing your Logos unlock files with your friends. (You have to restart > the program each time you switch unlock files, and as far as i know, you > can't combine them.) Like I said before I think that the mechanism that is now set up is just fine, but of course other may have other opinions. > Paul > --------- > "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 > http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear > > P.S. Quick gripe: Jonathan, Can you turn of HTML on your email > messages? It makes them very hard to read. Sorry about the HTML on in my email it is AOL, so I will have to find out how to turn that off. Thanks again Paul for your comments, I will be contemplating them for a while! I am sure this issue with come up again. Hey, I would love to here what you think of the official letter I plan on sending to publishers, you can find it on the Copyright Website: http://www.crosswire.org/sword/copyright/ -Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 27 10:27:18 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 20:27:18 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyright website) References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> <002501c0881f$72ea5f20$6a8a2d3f@family> Message-ID: <3A72A286.DBC072E@bigfoot.com> Jonathan Hughes wrote: > > Paul, > > I would like to first of all thank you for taking the time, to respond, > and in such depth. That really means a lot to me because that is how I will > see and understand flaws in my plans and strategy! I don't really think it's so much a flaw in your plans as simply an unrealistic dream. I think efforts need to be concentrated on developing and publishing unencumbered content rather than trying to unencumber existing content that is out there. I'm still tossing up in my own mind which option is best for unencumbered texts: to have the software copyrighted, but protected by a free software-like license (e.g. the OPL ) or to simply have the text in the public domain. The latter strategy has been taken with the WEB, and the former by GLW (both on MPJ's site ). Jerry, are you out there? I'd be interested in your thoughts on the copyright + open license vs. public domain issue. My current thoughts are that public domain would be more desirable in terms of open philosophy, but that it would leave the texts open to becoming copyrighted again through people doing work on the texts and slapping their own copyright on them. That is something i definitely want to avoid, so at the moment, i lean more towards copyrighting and using the OPL or a similar license. > ... > I understand > how the world works and how business works, but I also know how God works, > and so that is why I have this as my goal. If God was number one for all of the publishers you are approaching, there would be no problem. However, he is the last thing on the mind of some of them (good luck with Zondervan!). > If we meet with opposition from > the publishers, then maybe we will need to modify the strategy to see if we > can liscense the modules to be distrupted for a small fee, but I will never > give up on trying to get all texts to be distrupted for free. This is where my technical comments come in. How do you distribute for a fee, when anyone can take one of those texts and copy it for all their friends? Has anyone (this means you, Troy and Chris :-) got any comments on my previous analysis of the unlock situation? > ... > I will check out the links, but like I said before I don't really want > to be involved in the technical side of how the modules will be distrupted, > I think it would sufice how we do it now with unlock keys, you are right > people can just decrypt the modules and spread the text around, but they can > do that with Online Bible, and pretty much any other Bible packages, so this > should not stop us. But it should be considered. The difference between us and nearly all the others is that Sword is free software. That puts us on the back foot right from the start. > ... > Yea, maybe not the close minded publishers, but some of our texts are > from individual people, and it maybe something we can show to them to let > them know that we as a political philosophy are commited to a product that > will help people, without the barier of fianances, etc. That is something that i think is worth checking out with those individuals. > ... > > P.S. Quick gripe: Jonathan, Can you turn of HTML on your email > > messages? It makes them very hard to read. > > Sorry about the HTML on in my email it is AOL, so I will have to find > out how to turn that off. Thanks. ;-) > Thanks again Paul for your comments, I will be > contemplating them for a while! I am sure this issue with come up again. > Hey, I would love to here what you think of the official letter I plan on > sending to publishers, you can find it on the Copyright Website: > http://www.crosswire.org/sword/copyright/ One thing i would suggest is of utmost importance is trying to get copyright release for forthcoming Bible versions. I know of two that are worth mention: the HCSB (Holman Christian Standard Bible) from LifeWay Christian Resources, and the ESV (English Standard Version) from Crossway Books. (I don't have any contact details for either of those.) These sound like they are going to be fairly significant translations (esp. the ESV - see below for some links), and if we can get the publishers to agree to free distribution early in the piece (pointing them to the precedent of Davidsons Press and the ISV), we would be in a good position. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear Links to articles about new Bible translations: (under the heading 'Manna, Mannah or Mana?') From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sat Jan 27 20:37:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 12:37:01 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Sword for CE problems Message-ID: I've got Sword almost building in eVC++. The compile works fine, but I'm still getting linker errors. I've cleared up most of them, but am still getting the following list of errors. Some of the later ones I can deal with. For example, I'm not yet including zlib stuff, so (un)compress isn't yet resolving. The ones I'm completely clueless about are "const type_info::`vftable'", "__RTDynamicCast", "__CxxFrameHandler", and "__CxxCatchReturn". Does anyone know what these are or have any ideas how to fix these last errors? I'm only 42 linker errors away from success. yay! :) --Chris Little sxl.lib(fclose.obj) : error LNK2005: fclose already defined in coredll.lib(COREDLL.dll) ztext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) rawtext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) swmodule.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) versekey.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) referenced in function "private: void __cdecl VerseKey::initstatics(void)" (?initstatics@VerseKey@@AAAXXZ) zcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl zCom::~zCom(void)" (??1zCom@@UAA@XZ) hrefcom.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) rawcom.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) rawfiles.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) rawgbf.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "const type_info::`vftable'" (??_7type_info@@6B@) referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl RawGBF::operator char *(void)" (??BRawGBF@@UAAPADXZ) ztext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast rawtext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast swmodule.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast versekey.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast zcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl zCom::operator char *(void)" (??BzCom@@UAAPADXZ) hrefcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast referenced in function "public: virtual char * __cdecl HREFCom::getRawEntry(void)" (?getRawEntry@HREFCom@@UAAPADXZ) rawcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast referenced in function "public: virtual char * __cdecl RawCom::getRawEntry(void)" (?getRawEntry@RawCom@@UAAPADXZ) rawfiles.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast rawgbf.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __RTDynamicCast referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl RawGBF::~RawGBF(void)" (??1RawGBF@@UAA@XZ) rawtext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler swmodule.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler zcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl zCom::operator char *(void)" (??BzCom@@UAAPADXZ) ztext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler hrefcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler referenced in function "public: virtual __cdecl HREFCom::~HREFCom(void)" (??1HREFCom@@UAA@XZ) rawcom.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler rawfiles.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler rawgbf.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxFrameHandler rawtext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn swmodule.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn zcom.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn ztext.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn hrefcom.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn referenced in function "public: virtual char * __cdecl HREFCom::getRawEntry(void)" (?getRawEntry@HREFCom@@UAAPADXZ) rawcom.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn rawfiles.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn rawgbf.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __CxxCatchReturn sapphire.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "void * __cdecl memset(void *,int,unsigned int)" (?memset@@YAPAXPAXHI@Z) referenced in function "public: void __cdecl sapphire::burn(void)" (?burn@sapphire@@QAAXXZ) swmodule.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol regfree referenced in function "public: virtual class ListKey & __cdecl SWModule::Search(char const *,int,int,class SWKey *,bool *,void (__cdecl*)(char,void *),void *)" (?Search@SWModule@@UAAA AVListKey@@PBDHHPAVSWKey@@PA_NP6AXDPAX@Z3@Z) swmodule.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol regexec referenced in function "public: virtual class ListKey & __cdecl SWModule::Search(char const *,int,int,class SWKey *,bool *,void (__cdecl*)(char,void *),void *)" (?Search@SWModule@@UAAA AVListKey@@PBDHHPAVSWKey@@PA_NP6AXDPAX@Z3@Z) swmodule.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol regcomp referenced in function "public: virtual class ListKey & __cdecl SWModule::Search(char const *,int,int,class SWKey *,bool *,void (__cdecl*)(char,void *),void *)" (?Search@SWModule@@UAAA AVListKey@@PBDHHPAVSWKey@@PA_NP6AXDPAX@Z3@Z) zipcomprs.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol compress referenced in function "public: virtual void __cdecl ZipCompress::Encode(void)" (?Encode@ZipCompress@@UAAXXZ) zipcomprs.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol uncompress referenced in function "public: virtual void __cdecl ZipCompress::Decode(void)" (?Decode@ZipCompress@@UAAXXZ) ARMRel/RapierBible.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 10 unresolved externals Error executing link.exe. Creating browse info file... RapierBible.exe - 42 error(s), 0 warning(s) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 28 17:50:41 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 18:50:41 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Available books of a module Message-ID: <01012818504100.02142@joachim> Hi! Is there a way to check which books exist in a module? I'd be glad for help! -- Joachim Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Sun Jan 28 20:21:26 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 13:21:26 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyright matters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyright website) In-Reply-To: <3A72A286.DBC072E@bigfoot.com> References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> <002501c0881f$72ea5f20$6a8a2d3f@family> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010128110858.009fba20@mail.dancris.com> I think there is room for both releasing as PD and licensing in some "open" way. I wish more Bible versions were being released as PD. But, I see reasons why even a Bible version could benefit from licensing. If you produce something like your own commentary, and don't want others editing your expressions and releasing the edited version without changes, a license can help you prevent others from putting words in your mouth. A lot depends on what is the purpose of releasing a work and what you want to protect it from. One of the key things I would require in a license, if I used one, would be a requirement that all changes be documented, and if possible, at least a footnote in any text at the point where it is changed. There are deeper issues. Personally, I don't like to have rules that men of good conscience will violate. If you copyright a Bible version, people that know what that means and what the law is will still violate the copyright believing they are honoring God. In any case, what will you do when people violate your copyright or license? Will you sue them in a court of law? Or just contact them and let them know that they are being bad? I have been busy this last week in a private email exchange between a person that publishes a commercial Bible CD, that claims his "copyright" on a public domain work has been infringed, and two programmers of free software, and another person that produced the original PD files that the two programmers are using. This incident will probably end with both sides thinking the other is wrong, but no one being sued. However, often after this kind of thing, there will be finger pointing and parties on both sides will use those on the other side as object lessons in future communications. This is bad for the Church. If a person has the Holy Spirit let him do what he is lead to do, in spite of what I think he should. If a person does not have the Holy Spirit, why should I waste my time treating the symptoms of his darkness, instead of using that time to help those seeking light? As you know, there is nothing magical about licenses such as GPL or OpenContent. Every work we put out could have a unique license. What GPL or OpenContent provide is a standard, and, hopefully, something that is well written and designed. But, CrossWire or another in this line of work, could produce another standard or standards, that would better fit the needs of this work. Therefor: with all that said, if I could have it my way, this is what I would do (mileage may vary depending on your own opinions). I would produce a statement that would indicate my hopes for how a work would be treated and used. Take all the things you would put in a license and write them as statements of desire. Instead of "you must" put "we hope you will." Instead of "you must not" put "we hope you won't." Then I would include in the statement a release to public domain. There could be a standard version of this statement. Perhaps a CrossWire Release to Public Domain Statement (CRPLS). Of course, people can just delete the statement and do whatever they want with the work, but they can answer to God and I won't feel a need to spend time fighting for the "rights." Jerry Hastings hastings@bf.org At 08:27 PM 1/27/2001 +1000, Paul Gear wrote: >Jerry, are you out there? I'd be interested in your thoughts on the >copyright + open license vs. public domain issue. My current thoughts >are that public domain would be more desirable in terms of open >philosophy, but that it would leave the texts open to becoming >copyrighted again through people doing work on the texts and slapping >their own copyright on them. That is something i definitely want to >avoid, so at the moment, i lean more towards copyrighting and using the >OPL or a similar license. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 10:27:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:27:46 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyrightmatters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyrightwebsite) References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> <002501c0881f$72ea5f20$6a8a2d3f@family> <4.2.0.58.20010128110858.009fba20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <3A7545A2.8BD666FB@bigfoot.com> Jerry Hastings wrote: > ... > I think there is room for both releasing as PD and licensing in some "open" > way. I wish more Bible versions were being released as PD. But, I see > reasons why even a Bible version could benefit from licensing. If you > produce something like your own commentary, and don't want others editing > your expressions and releasing the edited version without changes, a > license can help you prevent others from putting words in your mouth. A lot > depends on what is the purpose of releasing a work and what you want to > protect it from. One of the key things I would require in a license, if I > used one, would be a requirement that all changes be documented, and if > possible, at least a footnote in any text at the point where it is changed. That's a good point: what are the requirements of a content license? The main issues from my perspective are: - that anyone should be able to use, copy, redistribute, and modify the work in any form without the requirement for specific permission from the author or payment of any licensing fee - that the portions of the work attributable to each contributor be clearly identifiable - that all derivative works be protected under the same conditions as the original work > There are deeper issues. Personally, I don't like to have rules that men of > good conscience will violate. If you copyright a Bible version, people that > know what that means and what the law is will still violate the copyright > believing they are honoring God. In any case, what will you do when people > violate your copyright or license? Will you sue them in a court of law? Or > just contact them and let them know that they are being bad? That depends. If i think the institution involved is not Christian and their offence was serious enough, i would certainly consider asking my legal counsel to write them a letter. It would not likely go as far as court, simply because i would not likely feel it would be worth it, but yes, i would contact them and tell them they are being bad. > ... > If a person has the Holy Spirit let him do what he is lead to do, in spite > of what I think he should. If a person does not have the Holy Spirit, why > should I waste my time treating the symptoms of his darkness, instead of > using that time to help those seeking light? Because licenses are a concise way of stating the conditions under which an author desires his or her work to be used, and because there are several good ones available already, it is little effort to apply them to new works. > ... > Therefor: with all that said, if I could have it my way, this is what I > would do (mileage may vary depending on your own opinions). I would produce > a statement that would indicate my hopes for how a work would be treated > and used. Take all the things you would put in a license and write them as > statements of desire. Instead of "you must" put "we hope you will." Instead > of "you must not" put "we hope you won't." That's a good point. Do you think that using that sort of approach means that the 'license' is more likely to be honoured? I personally do not - i think people are less likely to violate a license than a 'statement of intent', simply because the modern Western world understands the importance of legal terminology and for the most part is rather litigation-averse. ;-) Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 15:29:00 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:29:00 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian Message-ID: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which ones. These are my thoughts: Personal commentary - so you can write notes (~40k) 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) KJV - it's standard (~2.2MB, less without Strongs ref.) 1 more modern translation - WEB (~1.4MB) Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references (~800k) Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) There's also a copyright issue. I assume the KJV with Strongs can't be included because the Strongs formatting is copyrighted by Larry Pierce. Is there an alternative version? Because there's already a couple of other programs that have the KJV it might not be allowed in anyway though. Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 15:52:16 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ivan E. Moore II) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 08:52:16 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost>; from danglassey@yahoo.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:29:00PM -0000 References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <20010129085216.A1628@tdyc.com> > I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as > core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every > module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which > ones. > > These are my thoughts: Personally I think this is the *only* one that should go in. It gives functionality without being tied to a specific religion. And it's small! For a distribution that's good. :) > Personal commentary - so you can write notes (~40k) While definatly good choices I truely think these would be better served sitting in the master repository. Maybe with a installer or proper docs pointing users here. > 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) > KJV - it's standard (~2.2MB, less without Strongs ref.) > 1 more modern translation - WEB (~1.4MB) > Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references > (~800k) > Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) > > There's also a copyright issue. I assume the KJV with Strongs can't > be included because the Strongs formatting is copyrighted by Larry > Pierce. Is there an alternative version? > > Because there's already a couple of other programs that have the > KJV it might not be allowed in anyway though. and also keeps the legal issues out of the distribution. :) just my 2cents Ivan -- ---------------- Ivan E. Moore II rkrusty@tdyc.com http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 16:18:28 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:18:28 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Daniel Glassey wrote: > I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as > core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every > module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which > ones. I don't understand the reason for the Debian restriction. Some general licencing with the modules' material or a Debianism? What about other Linux distributions, e.g. RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE; subject to the same restrictions? > These are my thoughts: I have radically different thoughts > KJV - it's standard (~2.2MB, less without Strongs ref.) > 1 more modern translation - WEB (~1.4MB) The AV I can livest without thank thee muchly. Certainly a readable modern translation should be core. Personally I'd like the CEV failing that the NLT or the NET(*). Maybe the ISV or GW. That is a translation is mandatory but nothing else. I don't think one should specify which translation is core. Just that at least one must be present for correct insttallation and operation. I might, for example, only want a Swedish translation without any English text at all. Though > Personal commentary - so you can write notes (~40k) is highly desirable. And might necessarily be considered core. The following are essential "nice to haves" but certainly shouldn't be considered "core" modules. > 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) > Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references (~800k) > Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) Perhaps a reading scheme might be included with these essentials. The Navigators publish on (as a PDF file, a Word document, and, if I recall correctly, as Palm and Outlook calendar updates). My preference is for "Through the Bible Every Day in One year" but unless it has recently appeared in on-line format there's only printed versions available. (A check of http://cover2cover.org/ later will tell me one way or the other.) Or lectionary. The new Church of England Lectionary for "Common Worship" isn't yet available on-line. > There's also a copyright issue. I'm not going to comment upon the copyright issue. I'm not a copyright lawyer; I'm not a lawyer at all. (*) Is any working on a NET module? I really like this translation and have the HTML version on my workstation. The footnoting is prolific, with every translational choice justified and corroborated. Wish that every translation committee were that thorough. They advertise Palm and Logos formats on their web site. I've got contacts with the NET team so if anyone's interested and no one's already done so I'll approach them about producing a sword module. I'd also be intersted in an ISV version but I only have the RTF file generated from Microsoft Word. And then only the New Testament; last time I looked the Old Testament hadn't been completed. The other modern translation I'd like to see is GW (God's Word). This too is available in electronic format but sadly only as PDF files. :-( Strcitly only for sampling purposes. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 16:20:16 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Brook Humphrey) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 08:20:16 -0800 Subject: Re[2]: [sword-devel] Iso Update In-Reply-To: <01012612124200.04606@joachim> References: <1667304902.20010125193632@webmedic.net> <01012612124200.04606@joachim> Message-ID: <16147775873.20010129082016@webmedic.net> Hello Joachim, Friday, January 26, 2001, 3:21:19 AM, you wrote: Joachim Ansorg> Hi! Joachim Ansorg> I had the same problems with configure. I compiled with "LDFLAGS="-lz Joachim Ansorg> -lstdc++ CPPFLAGS=/path/to/swordir/include/ ./configure" this part is easy for me to understand. I just put this in place of the regular configure line. Joachim Ansorg> To compile with Sword 1.51a you have to replace in line "Delete()" with Joachim Ansorg> "deleteEntry()". In what file do I look for this? I don't mind looking but I jave been unable to find it. Or am I missing omething obvious? Joachim Ansorg> Maybe you have to edit configure.in to change the -lcurses part to -lncurses. This I found and changed. Joachim Ansorg> I hope this helps you! Joachim Ansorg> I'm so glad that you have so much experience with RPMS. Joachim Ansorg> Without you we would have much more work! Joachim Ansorg> Thank you Brook! Joachim Ansorg> Joachim >> Hello Sword, >> >> I tracked down the Irenaeus rpm's and put them in the beta directory >> for the cd. I didn't make these rpm's they were made by the author. >> I don't really like the rpm itself it needs some work but everytime >> I try to compile it on my system it tells me that I don't have a >> working compiler. Which is imposible because I just used the >> compiler to compile bibletime, sword, gnomesword and others. Anyway >> I included the authors original rpm it runs on my mandrake system >> but there are some screen refresh problems wich the author is >> already aware of. -- Best regards, Brook mailto:bah@webmedic.net From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 16:44:54 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ivan E. Moore II) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:44:54 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: ; from trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:18:28PM +0000 References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <20010129094454.A15255@tdyc.com> > > I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as > > core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every > > module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which > > ones. > > I don't understand the reason for the Debian restriction. Some general > licencing with the modules' material or a Debianism? What about other > Linux distributions, e.g. RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE; subject to the same > restrictions? There are no restrictions. It's preference. There are several hundred megs worth of modules for sword. They could potentially take up their own CD. Debian developers (not sure about other distros) are not going to be too happy (nor will the mirrors) about increasing the size of the distribution by a 1/3 with non-technical packages that are specific to sword. Ivan -- ---------------- Ivan E. Moore II rkrusty@tdyc.com http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 17:00:10 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:00:10 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > (*) Is any working on a NET module? Because of their licensing restrictions, we would be unable to distribute the NET, so I haven't bothered creating a module. It's on my todo list, but comes after every other possible use of my time. > I'd also be intersted in an ISV version but I only have the RTF file > generated from Microsoft Word. And then only the New Testament; last time > I looked the Old Testament hadn't been completed. We have the ISV in SWORD format. It's not a very good edition, lacking the notes entirely. I'm working on a new edition, with notes, but it will take me some time to complete yet. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 17:05:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:05:34 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <3A75A2DE.2291.1A48D02@localhost> On 29 Jan 2001, at 15:29, Daniel Glassey sent forth the message: > There's also a copyright issue. I assume the KJV with Strongs can't > be included because the Strongs formatting is copyrighted by Larry > Pierce. Is there an alternative version? Actually, this makes me think of an idea for another project. It's a _lot_ of work probably, but Strongs numbers could be added to WEB or another version. Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 17:05:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Daniel Glassey) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:05:34 -0000 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <3A75A2DE.27928.1A48CC4@localhost> On 29 Jan 2001, at 16:18, Trevor Jenkins sent forth the message: > On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Daniel Glassey wrote: > > > I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as > > core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every > > module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which > > ones. > > I don't understand the reason for the Debian restriction. Some general > licencing with the modules' material or a Debianism? Resources. The Debian archive is mirrored all over the place and it is unreasonable take up a large portion of the distribution with just our data. This is to actually get it to be part of the distribution not just to make packages. > What about other > Linux distributions, e.g. RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE; subject to the same > restrictions? I'd assume so though I don't know if anyone has tried to get them in. > > These are my thoughts: > > I have radically different thoughts fair enough :) > > KJV - it's standard (~2.2MB, less without Strongs ref.) > > 1 more modern translation - WEB (~1.4MB) > > The AV I can livest without thank thee muchly. whatever. > Certainly a readable modern translation should be core. I'd agree, they are just hard to get hold of in a freely distributable manner :( > Personally I'd like the CEV failing that the > NLT or the NET(*). Maybe the ISV or GW. Well, they would need to be made into sword modules first! > That is a translation is mandatory but nothing else. I don't think one > should specify which translation is core. Just that at least one must be > present for correct insttallation and operation. I might, for example, > only want a Swedish translation without any English text at all. Yep, that's a problem, but I doubt more than 1 will get in. All others will be at crosswire (theres currently a conversion of all the rpms on the crosswire site at ftp://kde.tdyc.com/pub/kde/debian/dists/potato/sword/binary-all/ ) and people can be directed to them. > Though > > > Personal commentary - so you can write notes (~40k) > > is highly desirable. And might necessarily be considered core. yep. > The following are essential "nice to haves" but certainly shouldn't be > considered "core" modules. > > > 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) > > Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references (~800k) > > Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) I was thinking that it would be good to have 1 of every type of module just to show what it does. I guess though that personal commentary may be enough, and Strongs is a bit irrelevant without a marked text. > Perhaps a reading scheme might be included with these essentials. The > Navigators publish on (as a PDF file, a Word document, and, if I recall > correctly, as Palm and Outlook calendar updates). My preference is for > "Through the Bible Every Day in One year" but unless it has recently > appeared in on-line format there's only printed versions available. (A > check of http://cover2cover.org/ later will tell me one way or the other.) > Or lectionary. The new Church of England Lectionary for "Common Worship" > isn't yet available on-line. That kind of thing would be good, though I'm not sure how it fits in with the module types. A 'calendar' type of module might be good. There is already the losung stuff (currently dictionary type) and there could be Spurgeons morning and evening as well. Thanks for your input :) Daniel _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 17:16:21 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:16:21 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: ; from trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:18:28PM +0000 References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <20010129131621.E684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:18:28PM +0000, Trevor Jenkins wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Daniel Glassey wrote: > > > I'm trying to sort out exactly which modules would be considered as > > core and would be necessary for a base install of sword. Not every > > module can be in Debian, just a few, so we need to decide which > > ones. > > I don't understand the reason for the Debian restriction. Some general > licencing with the modules' material or a Debianism? What about other > Linux distributions, e.g. RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE; subject to the same > restrictions? Sheer size. If/when the proposed (and as far as I know, approved in principle) "data" section is implemented, it is a problem to have multiple gigabytes of data added to Debian. We (Debian) are mirrored liberally around the world and cannot just dump tons of data into the main archive without providing a mechanism for making partial mirrors that omit the added bloat practical. > > These are my thoughts: > > I have radically different thoughts > > > KJV - it's standard (~2.2MB, less without Strongs ref.) > > 1 more modern translation - WEB (~1.4MB) > > The AV I can livest without thank thee muchly. Certainly a readable modern > translation should be core. Personally I'd like the CEV failing that the > NLT or the NET(*). Maybe the ISV or GW. The reason the KJV is helpful is Strong's. The suggestion that the KJV *and* a more modern translation should be included is, in my opinion, a very sensible one, if only because it allows the user to explore the full capabilities of sword. Besides, the user gets to choose whether one or the other or both texts are installed, as I explain below. > That is a translation is mandatory but nothing else. I don't think one > should specify which translation is core. Just that at least one must be > present for correct insttallation and operation. I might, for example, > only want a Swedish translation without any English text at all. Well, that could easily be accomplished with alternatives specified in libsword's dependencies. One translation will appear as the default but the user may opt to install one of the alternatives, e.g. Depends: sword-module-kjv | sword-module-web | sword-module-swedish (The package names above are for illustration purposes only. I'm not suggesting that they are good names :) Or this could even be expressed in terms of a "virtual package". That is, each package that provides a bible text would have "Provides: sword-bible-text" and then Dan would list in the libsword package: Depends: sword-module-kjv | sword-bible-text Both arrangements would make libsword install KJV by default, but would allow the user to override this by choosing a different Bible text instead. > The following are essential "nice to haves" but certainly shouldn't be > considered "core" modules. > > > 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) > > Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references (~800k) > > Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) I think "core" is the wrong term. "Core" suggests "stuff that libsword needs to work properly". It seems what we are looking for is a usable enough sampling of the modules available for sword that the package could be used with what Debian alone provides quite successfully by most (English-speaking) people. It gives the user an idea of what sword is capable of without having to provide every single module within Debian. Basically, the stuff that goes on this list will come off the Debian CD and anything else the user will have to haul off the Internet or order a sword text CD for. None of the additional modules other than the Bible text itself need to be considered a "Depends" for libsword. They could all simply be listed as "Suggests" which will list all of the modules that Dan will package. The "apt-get" tool does not do anything with "Suggests". Only those using a front-end like dselect will ever see the suggested additional modules, and none of the suggestions are enforced by the front-end. They are presented merely as optional extra stuff that the user may select if desired. Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 17:18:51 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:18:51 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <20010129085216.A1628@tdyc.com>; from rkrusty@tdyc.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:52:16AM -0700 References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> <20010129085216.A1628@tdyc.com> Message-ID: <20010129131851.F684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Dan wrote: > There's also a copyright issue. I assume the KJV with Strongs can't > be included because the Strongs formatting is copyrighted by Larry > Pierce. Is there an alternative version? argh. i missed this point, which knocks down my argument *for* Strongs. Ah well, my other points stand. :) Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 18:24:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:24:01 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <20010129131851.F684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca>; from synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 01:18:51PM -0400 References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> <20010129085216.A1628@tdyc.com> <20010129131851.F684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: <20010129142401.G684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 01:18:51PM -0400, Ben Armstrong wrote: > argh. i missed this point, which knocks down my argument *for* Strongs. er, *for* KJV I meant to say (I'm really not getting the hang of email today :) Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 18:34:10 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Don A. Elbourne Jr.) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:34:10 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation Message-ID: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> I'd like to come at the copyright issue from a little different angle. With all due respect to Jonathan and his "Copyright Battle," it is going to be very difficult to convince publishers to give away the material that puts food on their table. Instead, why not begin an open content creation initiative? There are a few things to consider before circumventing the traditional publication process. For those interested I'd recommend reading a very interesting article, "Publishers: Who Needs Them?" by David J. A. Clines http://www.shef.ac.uk/~biblst/DJACcurrres/Publishers.html I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the goals be? What type of content should be created? Any feedback is welcome. Don A. Elbourne Jr. http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 19:17:11 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:17:11 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <3A75A2DE.2291.1A48D02@localhost> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Daniel Glassey wrote: > On 29 Jan 2001, at 15:29, Daniel Glassey sent forth the message: > > > There's also a copyright issue. I assume the KJV with Strongs can't > > be included because the Strongs formatting is copyrighted by Larry > > Pierce. Is there an alternative version? > > Actually, this makes me think of an idea for another project. It's a > _lot_ of work probably, but Strongs numbers could be added to > WEB or another version. That would be a considerable project. One of my objections to the KJV is its formal equivalence translation philosophy. Some modern transaltions (perhaps, NKJV, NRSV) are also formal in philosophy. These can be tagged with Strong's numbers fairly easily. However, any meaning-based translations such as my preferred CEV would be a lot harder to give equivalence original words and English expressions. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 20:06:42 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 06:06:42 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian References: Message-ID: <3A75CD52.746576E8@bigfoot.com> Trevor Jenkins wrote: > ... > (*) Is any working on a NET module? I really like this translation and > have the HTML version on my workstation. The footnoting is prolific, with > every translational choice justified and corroborated. Wish that every > translation committee were that thorough. They usually are - it's just that we see the results of their labour, not the process. Most of the modern comittee translations had a very thorough review process. The reason we don't see the notes on them is probably cost. Most publishers would balk at printing that many notes that most people aren't going to read. > ... > I'd also be intersted in an ISV version That would be the "International Standard Version version"? :-) Sorry. It's a pet peeve of mine. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 20:42:40 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:42:40 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] e-Sword collaboration & other copyrightmatters (including Jonathan's original post about the copyrightwebsite) In-Reply-To: <3A7545A2.8BD666FB@bigfoot.com> References: <3A501DBE.7020700@brooks.fdns.net> <3A70DA8E.BFEE262@bigfoot.com> <002501c0881f$72ea5f20$6a8a2d3f@family> <4.2.0.58.20010128110858.009fba20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010129093320.00ab3580@mail.dancris.com> Paul Gear wrote: >The main issues from my perspective are: >- that anyone should be able to use, copy, redistribute, and modify the >work in any form without the requirement for specific permission from >the author or payment of any licensing fee That is good. Some licenses require permission for a change to the semantic content but other changes do not need it. Some require or suggest that a copy of the new version be sent in, even if permission is not required. >- that the portions of the work attributable to each contributor be >clearly identifiable Good. >- that all derivative works be protected under the same conditions as >the original work Also good. Some allow for the changes to be placed in the Public Domain. But, that can create confusion as to which parts are protected and which are PD. >If i think the institution involved is not Christian and >their offence was serious enough, i would certainly consider asking my >legal counsel to write them a letter. It would not likely go as far as >court, simply because i would not likely feel it would be worth it, but >yes, i would contact them and tell them they are being bad. And then those that know what is going on, see that the license has no bite. But, because the idea of the license is to give things away, that may not be much of a problem. Not like MP3s where the copyright holders are trying keep from giving things away. >Because licenses are a concise way of stating the conditions under which >an author desires his or her work to be used, and because there are >several good ones available already, it is little effort to apply them >to new works. That is true. The effort is not so much in the placing of the license on the work, it is in enforcing it. But again, because this license is for giving things away, that may not be a big deal. >That's a good point. Do you think that using that sort of approach >means that the 'license' is more likely to be honoured? I personally do >not - i think people are less likely to violate a license than a >'statement of intent', simply because the modern Western world >understands the importance of legal terminology and for the most part is >rather litigation-averse. ;-) The statement of intent is more likely to be violated. If a difference in degree is the most important thing, then go with the license. The license may also encourage others by establishing that their free efforts can be added to a body of free works that will not be diverted for someone's gain. Their gain is not a big deal to me. The really ugly thing is the guy that creates a derivative work and releases it copyrighted without the license and prevents others from freely using his work. That would be a violation of the license. But, if he can't do it with your work he may not do it at all. Are we better off for that? It would be unfair, but there would be another new work. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 20:48:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:48:46 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Strong's numbers In-Reply-To: <3A75A2DE.2291.1A48D02@localhost> References: <3A758C3C.21957.14C2423@localhost> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010129134453.00ab7100@mail.dancris.com> Being that WEB is somewhat in the KJV family, it may be an easier place to start. You could use the KJV Wigram as a guide. Jerry At 05:05 PM 1/29/2001 +0000, Daniel Glassey wrote: >Actually, this makes me think of an idea for another project. It's a >_lot_ of work probably, but Strongs numbers could be added to >WEB or another version. > >Daniel From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:13:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:13:01 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> I think that is a great idea. On the down side, does anyone want a Tom, Dick, and Harry commentary? I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry are. My guess is, there are a lot of Scholars out their that have works that have never been published. Rather than collect dust, they could be scanned (if scannable) and volunteers could work to make them Sword ready. Jerry At 12:34 PM 1/29/2001 -0600, Don A. Elbourne Jr. wrote: > >I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle >copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, >greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content >ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the >goals be? What type of content should be created? > >Any feedback is welcome. > > > >Don A. Elbourne Jr. >http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:36:23 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:23 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Chris Little wrote: > > (*) Is any working on a NET module? > > Because of their licensing restrictions, we would be unable to distribute > the NET, so I haven't bothered creating a module. It's on my todo list, but > comes after every other possible use of my time. Elsewhere I suggested a module creator for those who already have a local copy the translation. > > I'd also be intersted in an ISV version but I only have the RTF file > > generated from Microsoft Word. And then only the New Testament; last time > > I looked the Old Testament hadn't been completed. > > We have the ISV in SWORD format. As I found when I checked the web site as my message went out. Isn't that always the way. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:30:02 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:30:02 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <20010129131621.E684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Ben Armstrong wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:18:28PM +0000, Trevor Jenkins wrote: > > > The following are essential "nice to haves" but certainly shouldn't be > > considered "core" modules. > > > > > 1 commentary - Matthew Henry Concise (~1.4MB) > > > Strongs references - Standard greek and Hebrew references (~800k) > > > Dictionary - Eastons or Naves or both (~1MB and ~700k) > > I think "core" is the wrong term. yes but ... > ... "Core" suggests "stuff that libsword > needs to work properly". The implication is greater than that. If only certain modules are included in the Debian distribution/mirrors that exactly what people will think. "These files are included in the distibution ergo they must be essential to the correct opertaion of the program." > It seems what we are looking for is a usable > enough sampling of the modules available for sword that the package could > be used with what Debian alone provides quite successfully by most > (English-speaking) people. It gives the user an idea of what sword is > capable of without having to provide every single module within Debian. Whilst that's a laudable intent I do not believe that this is how people will view the inclusion of a selected few modules. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:24:47 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:24:47 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Don A. Elbourne Jr. wrote: > I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle > copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, > greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content > ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the > goals be? What type of content should be created? I'll answer the last question first (a good Biblical principle) translation. But that's a huge task. Look at Eugene Petersen or J B Phillips. 10 years for the New Testament, which is the average for such work. There were over 100 people involved i the NIV tansaltion committees. Whilst my primary interest is in translation I've no desire what so ever to add to the plethora of English translations by creating another one. Especially as there is little to distinguish some of current FE based translations on the market. Maybe over time (three years, if I stuck to it) my notes from following the IVP "Search the Scripture" study plan. But I'm no Matthew Henry. > Any feedback is welcome. I think it infeasible to create new content for Sword just to get around copyright issues. More realistically picking up some of the PD works at CCEL would add commentary modules. Tools to help create personal modules from copyright material already in a user's possession would be better. For example a tool to convert the NET HTML pages into a sword module I could use would be great. Then others who have also got the same HTML files could create the identical module for themselves. For a de-PDF utility to create a GW module I can use instead of their downloadable PDF files. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:50:35 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (malbisse) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:50:35 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: Non-published works by scholars is a very interesting idea. Knowing the scholarly community, and a bit about the publishing community, it seems very likely to be true. Perhaps if something "official" was worked up in terms of an invitation to submit works for formatting for Sword, and then submitted to some of the scholarly e-lists such as b-greek, Xtalk, etc. it might open up some very interesting avenues. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Hastings" To: ; Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation > I think that is a great idea. On the down side, does anyone want a Tom, > Dick, and Harry commentary? I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry > are. My guess is, there are a lot of Scholars out their that have works > that have never been published. Rather than collect dust, they could be > scanned (if scannable) and volunteers could work to make them Sword ready. > > Jerry > > At 12:34 PM 1/29/2001 -0600, Don A. Elbourne Jr. wrote: > > > >I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle > >copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, > >greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content > >ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the > >goals be? What type of content should be created? > > > >Any feedback is welcome. > > > > > > > >Don A. Elbourne Jr. > >http://elbourne.org > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 21:58:58 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:58:58 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <01012922585802.07035@joachim> Something like the MAK commentary which si on crosswire.org? MAK = "Matthias Ansorgs Kommentar" = "Mathias Ansorg's Commentary" It's the personal commentary of my brother Matthias :) He used ThML and the formatting looks nice. Is this you talked about? --Joachim > I think that is a great idea. On the down side, does anyone want a Tom, > Dick, and Harry commentary? I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry > are. My guess is, there are a lot of Scholars out their that have works > that have never been published. Rather than collect dust, they could be > scanned (if scannable) and volunteers could work to make them Sword ready. > > Jerry > > At 12:34 PM 1/29/2001 -0600, Don A. Elbourne Jr. wrote: > > > >I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle > >copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, > >greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content > >ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the > >goals be? What type of content should be created? > > > >Any feedback is welcome. > > > > > > > >Don A. Elbourne Jr. > >http://elbourne.org -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 22:02:59 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:02:59 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01012923025903.07035@joachim> Hi! > On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Don A. Elbourne Jr. wrote: > > I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle > > copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, > > greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create > > content ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what > > should the goals be? What type of content should be created? > > I'll answer the last question first (a good Biblical principle) > translation. But that's a huge task. Look at Eugene Petersen or J B > Phillips. 10 years for the New Testament, which is the average for such > work. There were over 100 people involved i the NIV tansaltion committees. > Whilst my primary interest is in translation I've no desire what so ever > to add to the plethora of English translations by creating another one. > Especially as there is little to distinguish some of current FE based > translations on the market. Sure, this is true for emglish commentaries. But there are (for example) almsot no german commentaries available for free. So I'd really prefer some user-created commentary if they do not contain unscriptural content. > I think it infeasible to create new content for Sword just to get around > copyright issues. More realistically picking up some of the PD works at > CCEL would add commentary modules. But almost all texts on CCEL are in english. Joachim -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 22:16:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:16:36 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: ; from trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:30:02PM +0000 References: <20010129131621.E684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:30:02PM +0000, Trevor Jenkins wrote: > > ... "Core" suggests "stuff that libsword > > needs to work properly". > > The implication is greater than that. If only certain modules are included > in the Debian distribution/mirrors that exactly what people will > think. "These files are included in the distibution ergo they must be > essential to the correct opertaion of the program." That's simply not the way Debian works. Things basically get packaged for Debian on a demand basis. The "Depends" vs. "Suggests" makes it clear what is required and what is not. In no way does a package's presence in Debian indicate "essentialness" of that package. Have you ever really looked at Debian? It's *huge*. A Debian CD will contain all kinds of packages and only subsets of data for many of them. Nowhere does Debian represent the data sets provided as "essential". If people are getting that impression, it is merely from ignorance (i.e., not reading the docs). If Dan is really concerned about people not being led astray, he can place it prominently in the description of each module. "This is one of a sampling of modules for Sword which has been packaged for Debian. For the full range of available modules see ." Of course, that is assuming that the user even bothers to look at the package description ... but if they're not even doing that, I'm afraid there's no help for them if they are getting the wrong impression. > > It seems what we are looking for is a usable > > enough sampling of the modules available for sword that the package could > > be used with what Debian alone provides quite successfully by most > > (English-speaking) people. It gives the user an idea of what sword is > > capable of without having to provide every single module within Debian. > > Whilst that's a laudable intent I do not believe that this is how people > will view the inclusion of a selected few modules. Regardless of how they view it, there is a practical problem Dan has to resolve here that has nothing to do with peoples' impressions. There is no "data" section in Debian yet, so he cannot burden the many Debian mirrors with the full range of distributable modules available for Sword. Therefore, it is necessary to select some subset of modules for starters. I believe it should be representative enough so that people can get a taste of what is available. This is exactly the same situation as Debian has with themeable window managers. There are many, many themes available. Debian doesn't package all of them. Instead, a subset of them are selected by the maintainer based on whatever criteria ("usability", "good looking", "small") the maintainer deems to be appropriate. If/when the user decides to try out some other themes, they have all of themes.org to select from. It should be the same way with Sword's modules. The modules packaged for Debian should satisfy the new Sword user's curiosity. Additionally, it would be nice to include a *useful* subset of modules, as some users will not have the means to easily obtain additional modules (e.g. if the user is not the person responsible for installing the package on the system, or the user doesn't have the bandwidth, etc.) Basically, it is up to Dan to decide which modules get included. Of course, it is also up to the Debian archive maintainer to put on the brakes if Dan decides to add 500M of modules to Debian, so Dan has to choose wisely. :) If I read his original request correctly, then, it was for advice in coming up with this subset of modules, not to decide what is "essential" and what is "not essential". The problem is simply one of arriving at a "best compromise" given the space constraints in the main archive. Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Mon Jan 29 22:33:08 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:33:08 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Ben Armstrong wrote: > Have you ever really > looked at Debian? No. I thought it was implicit in my original reply that I do not use Debian. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 00:28:49 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:28:49 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: ; from trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:33:08PM +0000 References: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:33:08PM +0000, Trevor Jenkins wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Ben Armstrong wrote: > > > Have you ever really > > looked at Debian? > > No. I thought it was implicit in my original reply that I do not use > Debian. Not really. Just that you didn't know about their policies. I didn't get an impression one way or the other what you do know about Debian. Well, as it stands today it takes 3 CDs to hold all of the binary packages for Debian "main". That number is only going to go up. I wouldn't be surprised if the next release required 4 CDs. Debian tries to combat that bloat a bit by not including a whole lot of data with the packages. Where a package requires lots of data, it is preferable to point to some other source for that data and not include it. With the addition of the "data" section there would no longer be that problem, as Debian mirrors (and CD vendors) could choose whether to carry the data or not. So it is possible that at some point all freely distributable Sword modules will be included in Debian. How much data are we talking about anyway? Which modules can be freely redistributed by anyone? Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 00:43:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Geoffrey W Hastings) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:43:34 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Strong's numbers Message-ID: <20010129.164334.-575969.0.geoffreyhastings@juno.com> On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:48:46 -0700 Jerry Hastings writes: > Being that WEB is somewhat in the KJV family, it may be an easier > place to > start. You could use the KJV Wigram as a guide. What about the American King James. Reading about the translation it sounds like it is pretty much the same as KJV with the "eths" dropped of words like "saith doeth etceth....:-) " And other cleanups to the text. > > Jerry > > At 05:05 PM 1/29/2001 +0000, Daniel Glassey wrote: > > >Actually, this makes me think of an idea for another project. It's > a > >_lot_ of work probably, but Strongs numbers could be added to > >WEB or another version. > > > >Daniel > ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 00:50:08 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jason VanScyoc) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:50:08 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: <00ae01c08a56$98a14420$0b00a8c0@LocalHost> In this e-mail, I will use the term 'works' to mean content (like a book), tools (like the Sword Project), lectures, Bible translations, etc. It is my understanding that God's works are created or done for the promotion of God's Truth. If this was not the intent behind a given work, I don't want to spend any of my resources promoting it. I believe that people are suppose to put God's will first in their life ... to allow Jesus to be their King, and only King. On one hand, let's consider someone who was being lead by God to create a 'work'. Did God tell them to place limits on how it can be distributed? I doubt it, but if God did tell them to restrict it's distribution, in any way, who are we to try and change it? The only restriction I can think of that was placed on the Bible was to not change it. (I am primarily thinking of Revelation.) So, was that the first content license? But on the other hand, when someone is creating a work, they do have to be careful to not have their primary motivation be anything but doing God's will. Satan has quite a bit of success getting people to fall for the money motivation. I think second to that would be fame ... a persons ego, or pride - they want their name associated with this great work. The third would be fear ... I encountered this when talking to the leader behind one of the Bible translations ... he seemed to be afraid that someone would steal his, and his translator's, work and corrupt it. I don't want to spend any of my time trying to overcome the restrictions that someone has placed on their work - if they change them on their own ok - but, if someone feels lead by God to try and negotiate with them - or if they want to track the progress of the copyrighted translations, go for it. I wouldn't mind knowing when they become free myself. Jason From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 03:08:26 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (sword-devel@crosswire.org) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:08:26 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: Message-ID: <3A76302A.8CDAA3A@gte.net> Trevor Jenkins wrote: > > Tools to help create personal modules from copyright material already in a > user's possession would be better. For example a tool to convert the NET > HTML pages into a sword module I could use would be great. Then others who > have also got the same HTML files could create the identical module for > themselves. For a de-PDF utility to create a GW module I can use instead > of their downloadable PDF files. There are various PDF to X tools in already in existance (where X is Text, HTML, etc.). I would think it would be fairly easy to take one of those as a starting point and create your own back end to create a new X. I recently used "pdftotext" the other day and found it very helpful. Kevin From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 04:17:59 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jonathan Hughes) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:17:59 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> Message-ID: <000f01c08a73$a7b80120$6b8c2d3f@family> Hello Everyone, Wow, all this discussion. I just wanted to add my couple of thoughts. (I only have a finite amount of them! ;) ) I believe that an open content license would be a great idea, I love the idea of being able to distribute a 'work' and give people the ability to use it without worrying about getting my permission. In fact I am going to go into the Christian content business in the future, and everything that I and my company does will be distributed under an open content license. But this would only help us, as the Sword Project team, for future works or works that we could get people to license under an open content type of a license. For all the translations, etc. that people already use and are not under this type of license and would probably never be under the open content umbrella, we need to do something else to get those works distributed. In copyright law all we need to do is get the copyright holder to grant permission for us to distribute their work(s). That is what I am doing, it would be great to have a translation that was open content or a commentary that is open content, if they were the caliber of the NIV, NKJV and what we have now. So this is where we are at and that is what I am doing, trying to get things distributed under the 'license' it is under now and that is just copyright law (I know copyright is probably not a license but you understand the analogy.) It will be interesting to see the reaction from publishers when I start sending out official letters this spring, I am sure we will be surprised to see what happens. With that in mind what do people think of the official letter I plan to send? Check it out at the Copyright Website: http://www.crosswire.org/sword/copyright/ I have not had any feedback about it! And whoever made the comment about how we need to make module making easy, amen to that! Maybe some documentation or simple tools to be used. In Christ, Jonathan jhughes@crosswire.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don A. Elbourne Jr." To: Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 10:34 AM Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation > I'd like to come at the copyright issue from a little different angle. With > all due respect to Jonathan and his "Copyright Battle," it is going to be > very difficult to convince publishers to give away the material that puts > food on their table. Instead, why not begin an open content creation > initiative? > > There are a few things to consider before circumventing the traditional > publication process. For those interested I'd recommend reading a very > interesting article, "Publishers: Who Needs Them?" by David J. A. Clines > http://www.shef.ac.uk/~biblst/DJACcurrres/Publishers.html > > I'd be interested to hear what others think. Instead of trying to wrestle > copyrights out of the clinched fists of those "rotten, no-good, selfish, > greedy, heartless, un-Christ-like, publishers" why not just create content > ourselves? What would be the barriers to such a project? what should the > goals be? What type of content should be created? > > Any feedback is welcome. > > > > Don A. Elbourne Jr. > http://elbourne.org From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 08:40:48 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Peter Snoek) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:40:48 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] New Sword CD References: <01012218013800.00713@joachim> <3A6D618C.C0A0C4CE@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <003601c08a98$5ae31ef0$0101a8c0@gandalf> Hi troy and all the others, I read a lot about an upcoming CD. Since my bandwidth is only ISDN, I would like to order a CD-rom. Is it possible, where (and how) do you want the money, and what does it cost? * or am I asking old questions again? * :) Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Troy A. Griffitts" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] New Sword CD > I'm gonna give it a few more days as others have expressed interest in > updating things. > > And this morning I got caught up again with CD orders. We're good thru > December with the last of what I had. It worked out just right, so I > think a few days won't hurt. > > -Troy. > > > > Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > Troy, I put some stuff of the alpha pages into BETA/win/ > > > > These are: > > > > vpl2mod.exe, mod2vpl.exe, sword-1.51a.exe, locales.zip and prn2sword.exe. > > > > I hope this is OK and the right directory, if you dislike it please remove > > them. > > > > I also updates some HOWTO/* files, some READMEs etc. > > I also updates the GnomeSword sources to the newest release. > > > > I think we should also update the binary in the root of the CD, but I don't > > have one. Could you do it, please? > > > > Thank you Troy! > > > > Joachim > > -- > > Joachim Ansorg > > BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de > > BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 14:04:00 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Will) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:04:00 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> <000f01c08a73$a7b80120$6b8c2d3f@family> Message-ID: <004101c08ac5$8239f280$bf3fd6d1@0020505357> The whole open content question, and Joachim and Malbisse's messages, suggested some things to me. What about getting volunteers to translate some of the commentaries and other material that is PD and available at CCEL and similar sites? Putting that material into German, French, Spanish, etc. would be a tremendous service, and it would not be "Tom, Dick or Harry" content. I'm not certain if this would work, but I wonder if running a page or two through one of the machine translation services on the Net would produce a good "jumping-off" point. Someone who knows the language could then go over it, polish it somewhat, add or correct specific theological terms, and pass the rough translation on to a native speaker of that language. That might take a lot of the brute force work out of translating it, and set up a sort of international assembly line. Any thoughts. Also, I wonder if Malbisse's suggestion could be carried out. There must be a lot of theology professors out there with unpublished manuscripts, class notes, etc. that will never see print for profit. What about contacting a few people and seeing if they want to contribute to a world-wide open source library? Also, Jonathan, I agree with you on the problem of existing works that are not open content and unlikely to be so. But I also was wondering about another approach to these publishers. What about all of the back-listed books that they hold copyright on but are never likely to re-issue for various reasons? Might some of the publishers be willing to work with the Sword Project on permission to use these more dated works, even when they are unwilling to license use of their latest projects? Just a few more thoughts. Will From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 15:36:09 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:36:09 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] New Sword CD In-Reply-To: <003601c08a98$5ae31ef0$0101a8c0@gandalf> References: <01012218013800.00713@joachim> <3A6D618C.C0A0C4CE@crosswire.org> <003601c08a98$5ae31ef0$0101a8c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <01013016360900.00519@joachim> Hi! On www.bibletime.de we (we are the team of BibleTime) offer to ship the crosswire Sword CD in Europe. Have a look at that page. --Joachim > Hi troy and all the others, > > I read a lot about an upcoming CD. Since my bandwidth is > only ISDN, I would like to order a CD-rom. > Is it possible, where (and how) do you want the money, > and what does it cost? > > * or am I asking old questions again? * :) > > Peter > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Troy A. Griffitts" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 11:48 AM > Subject: Re: [sword-devel] New Sword CD > > > I'm gonna give it a few more days as others have expressed interest in > > updating things. > > > > And this morning I got caught up again with CD orders. We're good thru > > December with the last of what I had. It worked out just right, so I > > think a few days won't hurt. > > > > -Troy. > > > > Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > Troy, I put some stuff of the alpha pages into BETA/win/ > > > > > > These are: > > > > > > vpl2mod.exe, mod2vpl.exe, sword-1.51a.exe, locales.zip and > > prn2sword.exe. > > > > I hope this is OK and the right directory, if you dislike it please > > remove > > > > them. > > > > > > I also updates some HOWTO/* files, some READMEs etc. > > > I also updates the GnomeSword sources to the newest release. > > > > > > I think we should also update the binary in the root of the CD, but I > > don't > > > > have one. Could you do it, please? > > > > > > Thank you Troy! > > > > > > Joachim > > > -- > > > Joachim Ansorg > > > BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de > > > BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 15:38:01 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:38:01 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Re: [bt-devel] fast search In-Reply-To: <3A75FAD0.E51D3DA8@crosswire.org> References: <3A75FAD0.E51D3DA8@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <01013016380101.00519@joachim> Hi! > Hey guys. Saw a few messages about indexed searching... > > Just wanted to say, current impl of index searching wreaks. It was > never intended to be used. It was an afternoon of work intended to be > an example of how to 'plug in' a new searching engine into the new > search framework. > > We had a number of people starting to write different search engines and > I wanted to faciliate them and give them an example. > > None of them actually ever submitted their code, so we are left only > with my cheezy example. > > Fast searching is still a todo item, so hopefully someone will take it > up as their project. > > Any takers? :) Maybe Trevor?? > -Troy. -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 20:06:21 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:06:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] Re: [bt-devel] fast search In-Reply-To: <01013016380101.00519@joachim> Message-ID: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > Fast searching is still a todo item, so hopefully someone will take it > > up as their project. > > > > Any takers? :) > > Maybe Trevor?? Yes. Now that my ME is going away I can begin to pick up the things that got dropped over the last 15 months. But I have to introduce them back gradually. Give me a little while to get the latest source tar-ball and look at what you (Troy) put in. I also need time to retrieve my email of my old Apple PowerBook, which I was using then; I recall that there were some discussions on some of the issues. But consider me in. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 20:36:28 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:36:28 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword Message-ID: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> I had a cool idea I want to share with you (at leat IMHO is cool ;) At the moment we have the problem, that Bible societies won't give us their texts for Sword. I think it's too unsecure for them to give them to OpenSource programs, because the security system can be removed by everybody. In a closed source application this is not true, it's a program like OLB, Bible Workshop or another commonly used Bible application. The security systems can't be removed (only by good crackers), the texts can be encrypted with good algorithms. For this solution we need a commercial Bible program, if it's possible for almost all plattforms the same program. My solution for this would be to put Sword under LGPL, program a good Bible study program and sell the program. The price should be enough to cover the expenses for module licenses etc., but it shouldn't by high. Only the commercial modules will be sold, the modules without copyright will be free. This would be the first cross-plattform application, which runs on WIndows / Linux / Mac (?) etc, which is cheap, has lots of freely available modules and which supports the copyrighted modules. What do you think? Joachim -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 21:58:03 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:58:03 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> Message-ID: I'm totally interested in doing something like this. I really don't know how we would organize a commercial venture though. As an alternative to putting Sword under LGPL, thereby allowing other non-open source groups/companies to benefit from Sword, I would suggest licensing Sword to the commercial group specifically under a non-GPL license. That way, the commercial group can distribute binary-only software under a commercial license while Sword-proper remains GPL. I'm not sure how security could be improved over what OLB, Logos, etc. offer. But I suppose we can at least offer security on par with these titles. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 01:16:00 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:16:00 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword References: Message-ID: <3A776750.BDACAFA8@crosswire.org> Do engineers really think our security is LESS secure than other Bible software. I thought it was much more secure. I understand that the non-technical publisher MAY think that since we are opensource, our security may be less secure, but we're using 128-bit on the fly encryption (which could be increased if we chose to increase our key sizes) I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module without having the unlock key. -Troy. Chris Little wrote: > > I'm totally interested in doing something like this. I really don't know > how we would organize a commercial venture though. > > As an alternative to putting Sword under LGPL, thereby allowing other > non-open source groups/companies to benefit from Sword, I would suggest > licensing Sword to the commercial group specifically under a non-GPL > license. That way, the commercial group can distribute binary-only software > under a commercial license while Sword-proper remains GPL. > > I'm not sure how security could be improved over what OLB, Logos, etc. > offer. But I suppose we can at least offer security on par with these > titles. > > --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 01:21:53 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:21:53 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian References: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> Regarding the KJV and Larry Pierce. We obtained permission to use Larry's text with strongs numbers as a base for a freely available SWORD module. I wouldn't have thought that we had a copyright issue. NONE of our TEXTS are GPL (not sure if that would make sense for anything other than a 'living document'), many are PD. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 01:49:13 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 17:49:13 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <3A776750.BDACAFA8@crosswire.org> Message-ID: > I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > without having the unlock key. Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 02:25:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ben Armstrong) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:25:46 -0400 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org>; from scribe@crosswire.org on Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 06:21:53PM -0700 References: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <20010130222546.R684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 06:21:53PM -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > Regarding the KJV and Larry Pierce. > > We obtained permission to use Larry's text with strongs numbers as a > base for a freely available SWORD module. > > I wouldn't have thought that we had a copyright issue. NONE of our > TEXTS are GPL (not sure if that would make sense for anything other than > a 'living document'), many are PD. The issue is "freely redistributable". If Debian needs to be granted special permission to redistribute the data, then it cannot be included. Please see http://www.debian.org/social_contract thorough account of which freedoms a package's license needs to provide in order to be included in Debian. In particular, any license requiring special permission to redistribute would fail: 8. License Must Not Be Specific to Debian The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of a Debian system. If the program is extracted from Debian and used or distributed without Debian but otherwise within the terms of the program's license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the Debian system. It all depends on the nature of your agreement with Larry. If this kind of free redistribution is what he intended, then it should be explicitly stated in the license for the package that the author has granted this freedom, otherwise Debian is unable to include his work. Ben -- nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 02:41:57 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 19:41:57 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword References: Message-ID: <3A777B75.63F17B20@crosswire.org> >> I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module >> without having the unlock key. >Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. Yes. Agreed, but is that any different than a win98 key, et. al.? I don't think we want to solve the software industry's copyright violation problems, just make violating them sufficiently difficult and blatant. Thoughts? -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 02:38:17 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Ted Rolle) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:38:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Chris Little wrote: > > > I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > > without having the unlock key. > > Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. > > --Chris Yes. I guess integrity would be the only thing stopping someone.... From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 03:01:17 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Troy A. Griffitts) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:01:17 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian References: <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> <20010130222546.R684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> Message-ID: <3A777FFD.84FE96BA@crosswire.org> Ben, Thanks, I'll further clarify this with Larry and keep ya posted. -Troy. Ben Armstrong wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 06:21:53PM -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > > Regarding the KJV and Larry Pierce. > > > > We obtained permission to use Larry's text with strongs numbers as a > > base for a freely available SWORD module. > > > > I wouldn't have thought that we had a copyright issue. NONE of our > > TEXTS are GPL (not sure if that would make sense for anything other than > > a 'living document'), many are PD. > > The issue is "freely redistributable". If Debian needs to > be granted special permission to redistribute the data, then it > cannot be included. > > Please see http://www.debian.org/social_contract > thorough account of which freedoms a package's license needs to > provide in order to be included in Debian. In particular, any > license requiring special permission to redistribute would fail: > > 8. License Must Not Be Specific to Debian > The rights attached to the program must not depend on the > program's being part of a Debian system. If the program is > extracted from Debian and used or distributed without Debian but > otherwise within the terms of the program's license, all parties > to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights > as those that are granted in conjunction with the Debian system. > > It all depends on the nature of your agreement with Larry. If this > kind of free redistribution is what he intended, then it should be > explicitly stated in the license for the package that the author has > granted this freedom, otherwise Debian is unable to include his work. > > Ben > -- > nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca > Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org > [ pgp key fingerprint = 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ] > [ gpg key fingerprint = 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ] From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 02:53:32 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Todd Shirey) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:53:32 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <3A777B75.63F17B20@crosswire.org> Message-ID: ...Generate a key based on a MAC address - if there is no network card installed generate the key from the OEM number from the hard drive. In either case the legal user of a module couldn't share the key with anyone. The key would work only on the machine for which it was generated. We do this with our commercial software. Todd -----Original Message----- From: owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org [mailto:owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org]On Behalf Of Troy A. Griffitts Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 9:42 PM To: sword-devel@crosswire.org Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword >> I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module >> without having the unlock key. >Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. Yes. Agreed, but is that any different than a win98 key, et. al.? I don't think we want to solve the software industry's copyright violation problems, just make violating them sufficiently difficult and blatant. Thoughts? -Troy. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 03:32:30 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (allen goforth) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:32:30 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword References: <3A776750.BDACAFA8@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <001a01c08b36$9a6fffe0$0300a8c0@p3600laptop> unsubscribe "We grow arid not for lack of wonders by for lack of wonder." --G. K. Chesterton ----- Original Message ----- From: "Troy A. Griffitts" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword > Do engineers really think our security is LESS secure than other Bible > software. I thought it was much more secure. > > I understand that the non-technical publisher MAY think that since we > are opensource, our security may be less secure, but we're using 128-bit > on the fly encryption (which could be increased if we chose to increase > our key sizes) > > I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > without having the unlock key. > > -Troy. > > > > Chris Little wrote: > > > > I'm totally interested in doing something like this. I really don't know > > how we would organize a commercial venture though. > > > > As an alternative to putting Sword under LGPL, thereby allowing other > > non-open source groups/companies to benefit from Sword, I would suggest > > licensing Sword to the commercial group specifically under a non-GPL > > license. That way, the commercial group can distribute binary-only software > > under a commercial license while Sword-proper remains GPL. > > > > I'm not sure how security could be improved over what OLB, Logos, etc. > > offer. But I suppose we can at least offer security on par with these > > titles. > > > > --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 23:47:28 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (sword-devel@crosswire.org) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:47:28 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: ; from Todd@Dental-Com.com on Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 09:53:32PM -0500 References: <3A777B75.63F17B20@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <20010130234728.A572@toshiba> On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 09:53:32PM -0500, Todd Shirey wrote: > ...Generate a key based on a MAC address - if there is no network card > installed generate the key from the OEM number from the hard drive. In > either case the legal user of a module couldn't share the key with anyone. > The key would work only on the machine for which it was generated. We do > this with our commercial software. > > Todd > This seems to me a very bad idea. If the user changes his network card, which I am planning on doing in my machine shortly, or changes his hard drive, which I have done twice within the past year and a half or so, what is he going to do? If there is a method for regenerating the key that does not require paying more money, then that can be used for pirated copies. If not, then the user must pay out more money when any piece of hardware to which the licenses have been tied has been changed. I am presently attempting to break this sort of protection on an old Mavis Beacon program we have, because the machine it was installed on was thrown away and all we have is a backup copy that detects that the hardware is different that what it was installed on. We payed for the software, but we can't use it. On the other hand, any method for protection which does not tie the license to the hardware or some other piece of software which the program should not mess with must (MS Office seems to use font files) must necessarily be insufficient to prevent piracy. The problem is really a conundrum that cannot be solved without being a pain to the customer. Bruce Schneier has an insightful artical on copyright protection at http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-9811.html. There is no truly secure way to do this, as Schneier shows so well. The only thing is to make it just difficult enough to keep honest folks honest. Alexander Garden > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org > [mailto:owner-sword-devel@crosswire.org]On Behalf Of Troy A. Griffitts > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 9:42 PM > To: sword-devel@crosswire.org > Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible > program based on Sword > > > >> I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > >> without having the unlock key. > > >Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. > > Yes. Agreed, but is that any different than a win98 key, et. al.? > I don't think we want to solve the software industry's copyright > violation problems, just make violating them sufficiently difficult and > blatant. > > Thoughts? > -Troy. > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Tue Jan 30 23:51:29 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (sword-devel@crosswire.org) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:51:29 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: ; from chrislit@chiasma.org on Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:58:03PM -0800 References: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> Message-ID: <20010130235129.B572@toshiba> On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:58:03PM -0800, Chris Little wrote: > I'm totally interested in doing something like this. I really don't know > how we would organize a commercial venture though. > > As an alternative to putting Sword under LGPL, thereby allowing other > non-open source groups/companies to benefit from Sword, I would suggest > licensing Sword to the commercial group specifically under a non-GPL > license. That way, the commercial group can distribute binary-only software > under a commercial license while Sword-proper remains GPL. > > I'm not sure how security could be improved over what OLB, Logos, etc. > offer. But I suppose we can at least offer security on par with these > titles. > > --Chris > > Perhaps the company could just provide a plug-in component that Sword would call to handle encrypted modules. The encrypted modules would also be provided by the company and could be included on the Sword CD after an agreement was signed. This way Sword itself could remain clearly open source and cooperation would be easier. Alexander Garden From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 06:27:15 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:27:15 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > ...Generate a key based on a MAC address - if there is no network card > installed generate the key from the OEM number from the hard drive. In > either case the legal user of a module couldn't share the key with anyone. > The key would work only on the machine for which it was generated. We do > this with our commercial software. That seems a bit extreme. Besides, I'm not sure how we would manage distributing modules with such unique keys. I guess we could use the MAC/OEM to encode/encrypt the real cipher key. For example, an unlocker utility sends our server your MAC/OEM, and it replies with a key that must be decrypted with your MAC/OEM to reveal the real key (which would be the same for all users). I suspect we'd get a lot of angry users though, when people started changing their hard drives & NICs. Here's a novel idea... maybe there are some commercial Bible software developers out there who would be interested in adopting an open source project, merging with us, or just marketing modules in our format. Maybe Larry Pierce/OLB since we seem to have (somewhat) similar markets and goals? Maybe OliveTree since our products /don't/ have similar markets (but mostly because I know they're on the list and have mentioned interest in OS)? Maybe Logos/Libronix because I assume there must be some reason Bob Pritchett is interested in being on the list? --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 06:50:22 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Chris Little) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:50:22 -0800 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <20010130235129.B572@toshiba> Message-ID: > Perhaps the company could just provide a plug-in component that Sword > would call to handle encrypted modules. The encrypted modules would > also be provided by the company and could be included on the Sword CD > after an agreement was signed. This way Sword itself could remain > clearly open source and cooperation would be easier. The problem I see with this is the ability to write exporters. An example of this would be the console front end diatheke. In one command, you can have it print an entire work, even if it is encrypted. If Sword remained open-source and just send calls to a closed-source dynamically-linked/shared-object library plug-in, anyone could copy the calls to their own program, make an exporter, and circumvent the protection entirely. What we could do is have an open-source front-end that used a statically-linked, closed-source, and undistributed library. That way, the front-end can go on being open-source, but would not be usable for locked modules unless it was the commercial version linked with the decryption library. It would still come down to the security of a single key though. I suspect that our security, as it stands, is as strong as any of the commercial products', despite our being open source. Without the key, you're going to have to do a nasty brute force attack on every module you want to crack. Most of the commercial modules are much less secure, relying instead on proprietary file formats and lists of texts to reveal/hide from the front-end rather than actual encryption. Logos is supposed to have numerous security models to meet a publisher's needs in their next version. We could implement something similar, ranging from simple key unlocks to hard-drive tied unlocks to online-viewing only unlocks. It might encourage publishers to increase nasty restrictions on use, however, so we might do well to pretend this possibility doesn't exist. --Chris From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 06:53:29 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:53:29 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010130234935.009fa240@mail.dancris.com> Good idea. Those lists could be just the place. We don't want to look like we are spaming the lists though. Any thought on how best to approach it? Jerry At 04:50 PM 1/29/2001 -0500, malbisse wrote: >Non-published works by scholars is a very interesting idea. Knowing the >scholarly community, and a bit about the publishing community, it seems very >likely to be true. > >Perhaps if something "official" was worked up in terms of an invitation to >submit works for formatting for Sword, and then submitted to some of the >scholarly e-lists such as b-greek, Xtalk, etc. it might open up some very >interesting avenues. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 07:17:40 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:17:40 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <01012922585802.07035@joachim> References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010130235548.009fd1b0@mail.dancris.com> Joachim Ansorg wrote: >Something like the MAK commentary which si on crosswire.org? > >MAK = "Matthias Ansorgs Kommentar" = "Mathias Ansorg's Commentary" > >It's the personal commentary of my brother Matthias :) Good thing your brother's name isn't Tom, Dick or Harry. :-) But as I said, "I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry are." And we now know who Matthias is. He is your brother. He is not some unknown Tom, Dick, or Harry. (At least to you.) :-) Don't get me wrong. If we get a TDH commentary we should offer it, if it is good. But a lot of users will want credentials. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 07:26:43 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:26:43 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <20010130222546.R684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> References: <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131002043.00ab9790@mail.dancris.com> This is a good example of why we should try to be as pure as we can in having modules that are "open" or PD. Jerry Ben Armstrong wrote: >The issue is "freely redistributable". If Debian needs to >be granted special permission to redistribute the data, then it >cannot be included. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 07:46:49 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Robyn Manning) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 18:16:49 +1030 Subject: [sword-devel] enabling NIV Message-ID: <01013118164900.01453@kanga> Hi all I'm waiting for a project to do and meanwhile am checking out the program. I don't understand how to unencrypt NIV bible. Help would be greatly appreciated. TIA Robyn From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 08:16:45 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:16:45 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] modules for debian In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010131002043.00ab9790@mail.dancris.com> References: <20010130222546.R684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> <20010129181636.K684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <20010129202849.L684@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> <3A7768B1.87A01D9E@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131010000.009fb5f0@mail.dancris.com> At 12:26 AM 1/31/2001 -0700, Jerry Hastings wrote: >>This is a good example of why we should try to be as pure >>as we can in having modules that are "open" or PD. >What do you mean by "be as pure as we can?" I mean that we should try to have a free, and open or PD version of a module when we can. There are PD KJV texts. We should promote one of them over a restricted KJV module. The modules that are free downloads, no keys needed, and are "open" or PD should standout and be promoted more than the others. >Why don't you say what you mean? To tired. >It is after 1:00am. Go to bed. Ok Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 08:29:12 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:29:12 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <004101c08ac5$8239f280$bf3fd6d1@0020505357> References: <000001c08a22$124c8620$a7830e18@mcity1.la.home.com> <000f01c08a73$a7b80120$6b8c2d3f@family> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131011722.009f92d0@mail.dancris.com> At 09:04 AM 1/30/2001 -0500, Will wrote: >What about getting volunteers to translate some of the commentaries and >other >material that is PD and available at CCEL and similar sites? Putting that >material >into German, French, Spanish, etc. would be a tremendous service, and it >would >not be "Tom, Dick or Harry" content. That could work. You want a good proofreader for the language in question. >machine translation Machines produce very bad grammar. Even worse than mine. But, it would be an interesting experiment to see if after it was proofread and edited if it would be quality and time efficient. >What about contacting a few people and seeing >if they want >to contribute to a world-wide open source library? Perhaps Troy can set up a public FTP incoming for it. If not, I can provide one. We just need someone with an unpublished work. >What about all of the back-listed books that they hold >copyright on >but are never likely to re-issue for various reasons? Might some of the >publishers be >willing to work with the Sword Project on permission to use these more dated >works, Worth a shot. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 08:38:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (James Gross) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:38:36 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation Message-ID:
>Good thing your brother's name isn't Tom, Dick or Harry. :-) But
>as I
>said, "I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry are." And we
>now
>know who Matthias is. He is your brother. He is not some unknown
>Tom, Dick,
>or Harry. (At least to you.) :-)
>
>Don't get me wrong. If we get a TDH commentary we should offer it,
>if it is
>good. But a lot of users will want credentials.
>
>Jerry
How about those of us who are not programmers setting up an advisory/review board.  We could ensure that the commentaries are Biblically sound.  We could have an application process where there needs to be at least one, if not two, pastor recommendations.  That way, we are able to say that the individuals on the board are not from a cult.  Additionally, we could make sure that more than one person reviews each commentary (so that we get more than one set of eyes looking for non-Biblical content).  We could also be looking for typographical/formatting errors.  Just a thought.
 
Jim

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 09:41:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:41:36 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131015304.009fc6a0@mail.dancris.com> Another great idea! I like it. Need to be careful with the "cult" word though. Open source software development is not a good place to practice counter cult methods. For reasons like that, a text review board should probably not be "official" and should have some distance between it and Crosswire. But, it would be nice to see a review of "unknown" works. One day I may want to see something written from a certain point of view. On another day I may want to look at something written from a differing point of view. It would be nice to have an idea of what way a work leans. And to know the quality of the writing. Jerry At 08:38 AM 1/31/2001 +0000, James Gross wrote: >How about those of us who are not programmers setting up an >advisory/review board. We could ensure that the commentaries are >Biblically sound. We could have an application process where there needs >to be at least one, if not two, pastor recommendations. That way, we are >able to say that the individuals on the board are not from a >cult. Additionally, we could make sure that more than one person reviews >each commentary (so that we get more than one set of eyes looking for >non-Biblical content). We could also be looking for >typographical/formatting errors. Just a thought. > >Jim > > >---------- >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at >http://explorer.msn.com From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 12:12:49 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:12:49 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword References: <3A776750.BDACAFA8@crosswire.org> Message-ID: <3A780141.58A5E2E9@bigfoot.com> "Troy A. Griffitts" wrote: > > Do engineers really think our security is LESS secure than other Bible > software. I thought it was much more secure. > > I understand that the non-technical publisher MAY think that since we > are opensource, our security may be less secure, but we're using 128-bit > on the fly encryption (which could be increased if we chose to increase > our key sizes) > > I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > without having the unlock key. Troy, did you read my last post about copyright/module unlocking? What about you, Chris? I really would like to know how you think we can have a free software unlocking system that handles key management securely. If you can see some holes in my argument, please let me know. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 12:59:57 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (James Gross) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 12:59:57 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation Message-ID:





>From: Jerry Hastings
>Reply-To: sword-devel@crosswire.org
>To: sword-devel@crosswire.org, sword-devel@crosswire.org
>Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation
>Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:41:36 -0700
>
>Another great idea! I like it. Need to be careful with the "cult" word
>though.

Good point. 

>Open source software development is not a good place to
>practice counter cult methods. For reasons like that, a text review board
>should probably not be "official" and should have some distance between it
>and Crosswire. But, it would be nice to see a review of "unknown" works.
>One day I may want to see something written from a certain point of
>view. On another day I may want to look at something written from a differing
>point of view. It would be nice to have an idea of what way a work leans.
>And to know the quality of the writing. 
>Jerry

Well, your ideas are great IMHO. Since we would need a person or persons to receive the works and prepare them for inclusion in Sword, they could also, possibly, review them and provide a short synopsis of the works.  I am no theologian, so I would dare not think that I could say whether something was "cult"-like or not.  I just know my Bible (though, not as well as I should).  So, I hope I didn't insult anyone when I included the "cult" word in the previous email.  I am just throwing out ideas.

In a similar vein, I will be working on short synopsis' of all of the modules.  That way, when we update the website, we can provide the synopsis' for the benefit of the user.  If anyone has already been working on such thing, please let me know. 

In Christ's Service

Jim

 


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 13:59:10 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Martin Gruner) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:10 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> References: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> Message-ID: <01013114591001.00585@martin> > At the moment we have the problem, that Bible societies won't give us their > texts for Sword. > I think it's too unsecure for them to give them to OpenSource programs, > because the security system can be removed by everybody. > > In a closed source application this is not true, it's a program like OLB, > Bible Workshop or another commonly used Bible application. > The security systems can't be removed (only by good crackers), the texts > can be encrypted with good algorithms. > > For this solution we need a commercial Bible program, if it's possible for > almost all plattforms the same program. I do not really understand this. How would the problem be solved by selling the programs and modules? There is software contains the "commercial" modules that users can buy, why should sword go the same way? > My solution for this would be to put Sword under LGPL, program a good Bible > study program and sell the program. This will involve a lot of work, and the users of the opensource bible programs like bibletime will not profit from it. Especially those who do not have the money to buy a program. What about another way to do it? For this aim it would not be necessary to create and sell a program; it might be sufficient to change towards another security architecture that can be published opensource; maybe just use libraries like openssl etc. -- might be necessary anyway for not having to use the same keys. This way the encrypted modules would be safe; and users wanting them could buy the modules while using their common sword frontend. Frontend programs would not have to be changed. > The price should be enough to cover the expenses for module licenses etc., > but it shouldn't by high. > Only the commercial modules will be sold, the modules without copyright > will be free. Martin From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 15:09:34 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (malbisse) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:09:34 -0500 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010130234935.009fa240@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: The best way to avoid the appearance of spamming is to write to the moderator, not to the list itself, explaining what the Sword Project is and what it is trying to accomplish as an open source project. A well-worded letter, explaining that full credit would be given to the author of the the module/commentary in the module itself, and on any web-sites where it is posted, would go a long way toward assuring that academics would be willing to give permission for their works to be included. I know that on some of my web searches, I've already seen complete, out-of-print books posted on a variety of theological topics by the authors themselves. I don't know why anyone who has done that would hesitate to give permission for world-wide distribution of their work. They would retain copyright, so that other Bible program publishers would not be able to simply include their works in for-profit programs. That might even encourage some of these other publisheres to offer to pay the authors something in order to include it in a commercial program. With a careful explanation, most of the e-list moderators would probably either permit a posting to their list, or include some sort of mention themselves, as they prefer. Malbisse ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Hastings" To: ; Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 1:53 AM Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation > Good idea. Those lists could be just the place. We don't want to look like > we are spaming the lists though. Any thought on how best to approach it? > > Jerry > > At 04:50 PM 1/29/2001 -0500, malbisse wrote: > >Non-published works by scholars is a very interesting idea. Knowing the > >scholarly community, and a bit about the publishing community, it seems very > >likely to be true. > > > >Perhaps if something "official" was worked up in terms of an invitation to > >submit works for formatting for Sword, and then submitted to some of the > >scholarly e-lists such as b-greek, Xtalk, etc. it might open up some very > >interesting avenues. > > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 17:04:46 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Trevor Jenkins) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:04:46 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Ted Rolle wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Chris Little wrote: > > > > I would challenge anyone to get a plain text version of a locked module > > > without having the unlock key. > > > > Yes, but once you have the key, you can pretty much give it out to anyone. > > Yes. I guess integrity would be the only thing stopping someone.... Perhaps, the use of public/private keys would help to prevent this. Lock a module with the users public key. They must therefore use their private key to unlock it. I'd be very wary of giving anyone my private key. Regards, Trevor British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living language. Support the campaign for formal recognition by the British government now! -- <>< Re: deemed! From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 15:14:32 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:14:32 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010130235548.009fd1b0@mail.dancris.com> References: <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010130235548.009fd1b0@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <01013116143201.00506@joachim> Hi! > >Something like the MAK commentary which si on crosswire.org? > > > >MAK = "Matthias Ansorgs Kommentar" = "Mathias Ansorg's Commentary" > > > >It's the personal commentary of my brother Matthias :) > > Good thing your brother's name isn't Tom, Dick or Harry. :-) But as I > said, "I guess that depends on who Tom, Dick and Harry are." And we now > know who Matthias is. He is your brother. He is not some unknown Tom, Dick, > or Harry. (At least to you.) :-) Ok ok, you think it's not wort it. But his commentary is in German, ond only his and another commentary exist in German, so it's really worth it to have at least two commentaries in German. If english would be my mother tongue i'd really prefer the well known ones. But in German no well knwon commentaries exist for free. > Don't get me wrong. If we get a TDH commentary we should offer it, if it is > good. But a lot of users will want credentials. > > Jerry Joachim -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux. From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 17:47:05 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:47:05 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131103714.00abd990@mail.dancris.com> However, if you had a private key under an alias and had covered your tracks in getting such locked modules, what would stop you from giving those modules and key away? It seems to me that all these "locks" are like locks on doors to buildings, which only keep out people that are unwilling to break a window. Jerry At 05:04 PM 1/31/2001 +0000, Trevor Jenkins wrote: >Perhaps, the use of public/private keys would help to prevent >this. Lock a module with the users public key. They must therefore use >their private key to unlock it. I'd be very wary of giving anyone my >private key. > >Regards, Trevor From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 18:20:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:20:36 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Open Content Creation In-Reply-To: <01013116143201.00506@joachim> References: <4.2.0.58.20010130235548.009fd1b0@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010129140325.00ab5e20@mail.dancris.com> <4.2.0.58.20010130235548.009fd1b0@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131104929.00abc100@mail.dancris.com> Joachim Ansorg wrote: >Ok ok, you think it's not wort it. I did not say that. And for all I know his commentary may be the best ever done. I am just saying that some people are going to want credentials or a trusted standard. This is more of a problem in English where there are other programs with standard works. In languages where there are no commentaries, for software or even in print, a TDH commentary could be a big hit. Also, I think it would be well worth the effort for anyone to produce their own personal commentary. The process of writing down comments, passage by passage is rewarding. But, if I was getting a commentary for others to use, I would be glad to find someone with better insights than mine to write it. But, that would not stop me from producing my own and distributing it as I saw fit. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 18:52:36 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jerry Hastings) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:52:36 -0700 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010131112330.00ab85c0@mail.dancris.com> Joachim Ansorg wrote: >For this solution we need a commercial Bible program, I think all you really need for that is to set up a commercial company that offers the Sword family of programs and modules along with locked modules and keys (or whatever security system works with Sword). You couldn't charge for the program, but you could charge shipping, handling and copying. And most important, you could charge for modules that are not licensed as non-commercial. That means you could charge and collect to cover the cost of royalties. Then you can go to the bible businesses and convince them that they can make enough money with you to be worth their effort and outweigh the risk of a few people making illegal copies. No matter what the security, some people will be able to break it. You need to convince them that there is enough money to be made to cover the unpaid copies. Also, you can farm out all the work. There are services that take orders, make CDs and do all the shipping for you. All you have to do is get the rights from the publishers, pay bills and taxes and take a profit. Jerry From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 19:26:12 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Jesse Jacobsen) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:26:12 -0600 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010131103714.00abd990@mail.dancris.com>; from hastings@dancris.com on Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 10:47:05AM -0700 References: <4.2.0.58.20010131103714.00abd990@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <20010131132612.A27173@strider> ... coming out of lurk mode. I've been following this thread, and just thought I'd insert my nickel here. On 01/31/01, Jerry Hastings wrote: > However, if you had a private key under an alias and had covered your > tracks in getting such locked modules, what would stop you from giving > those modules and key away? It seems to me that all these "locks" are like > locks on doors to buildings, which only keep out people that are unwilling > to break a window. That's right, and I think as it should be. Is it realistic to expect Fort Knox? How many people would want to live as the President's family does, in the White House, with armed guards at every corner and Secret Service at every turn? If it were possible to make the encryption and key-exchange process totally secure, then it would be impractical and no fun at all to use locked databases! I don't think total security is possible without a major hassle for users. When I buy a book, I expect to be able to read (use) it totally at my convenience. It's only right to expect the same thing from a locked database, IMO. It may be illegal to photocopy over N pages from a paper book, selling them for profit, but there's nothing in the book's format or distribution scheme that prevents me from doing so with the same kind of security that's being demanded of Sword. On the contrary, there's just a copyright notice, and maybe a warning about the law, and the rest is in the hands of the buyer. If the buyer does not comply with copyright law, the onus for breaking the law is on him, not on the publisher or the distributor of the book. So it seems to me that a public/private key encryption scenario (which provides excellent security, technically), is sufficiently secure from all practical points of view. If the owner of a copyright is not satisfied with it, then perhaps that owner should not allow any electronic distribution, realizing that even paper distribution carries significant risks when there is a thief in the picture. How much should a project like Sword be expected to dabble in the field of law enforcement? There's a limit in there somewhere, and it would make things easier for everyone if it could be well-defined. Just some thoughts, Jesse ... returning to lurk mode. -- Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for. 1024D/2E3EBF13 Jesse Jacobsen (Grace, Madison WI) From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 20:08:52 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 06:08:52 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bibleprogram based on Sword References: <4.2.0.58.20010131112330.00ab85c0@mail.dancris.com> Message-ID: <3A7870D4.D87966B7@bigfoot.com> Jerry Hastings wrote: > > Joachim Ansorg wrote: > > >For this solution we need a commercial Bible program, > ... > Also, you can farm out all the work. There are services that take orders, > make CDs and do all the shipping for you. All you have to do is get the > rights from the publishers, pay bills and taxes and take a profit. ... and the small issue of writing an unlocking system. Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 20:13:59 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Paul Gear) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 06:13:59 +1000 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword References: Message-ID: <3A787207.B604EB24@bigfoot.com> Chris Little wrote: > > > ...Generate a key based on a MAC address - if there is no network card > > installed generate the key from the OEM number from the hard drive. In > > either case the legal user of a module couldn't share the key with anyone. > > The key would work only on the machine for which it was generated. We do > > this with our commercial software. > > That seems a bit extreme. Besides, I'm not sure how we would manage > distributing modules with such unique keys. I guess we could use the > MAC/OEM to encode/encrypt the real cipher key. For example, an unlocker > utility sends our server your MAC/OEM, and it replies with a key that must > be decrypted with your MAC/OEM to reveal the real key (which would be the > same for all users). I suspect we'd get a lot of angry users though, when > people started changing their hard drives & NICs. Amen. Hardware tying is a crazy idea for an end-user application program. > Here's a novel idea... maybe there are some commercial Bible software > developers out there who would be interested in adopting an open source > project, merging with us, or just marketing modules in our format. Maybe > Larry Pierce/OLB since we seem to have (somewhat) similar markets and goals? > Maybe OliveTree since our products /don't/ have similar markets (but mostly > because I know they're on the list and have mentioned interest in OS)? Why would any of these people want to do that? I can't see a motive for them other than the open source issue, and they can do that themselves without any help from us. > ... > Maybe Logos/Libronix because I assume there must be some reason Bob > Pritchett is interested in being on the list? So he can gloat about how far ahead of us he is. ;-) Paul --------- "He must become greater; i must become less." - John 3:30 http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 16:00:26 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Alexander Garden) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:00:26 +0000 Subject: [sword-devel] enabling NIV In-Reply-To: <01013118164900.01453@kanga>; from robynman@dove.net.au on Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 06:16:49PM +1030 References: <01013118164900.01453@kanga> Message-ID: <20010131160026.A1254@toshiba> Greetings, First, get the list of encryption keys from http://www.crosswire.org/sword/ALPHAcckswwlkrfre22034820285912/ Edit /wherever/you/put/sword/modules/mods.d/niv.conf. On my system that's /usr/share/sword/mods.d/niv.conf. Copy the NIV key and place it at the end of the line that looks like: CipherKey= That should do it. Alexander Garden On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 06:16:49PM +1030, Robyn Manning wrote: > Hi all > > I'm waiting for a project to do and meanwhile am checking out the program. I > don't understand how to unencrypt NIV bible. > > Help would be greatly appreciated. > > TIA > > Robyn > From sword-devel@crosswire.org Wed Jan 31 22:29:50 2001 From: sword-devel@crosswire.org (Joachim Ansorg) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:29:50 +0100 Subject: [sword-devel] Cool idea: Commercial Linux /Windows Bible program based on Sword In-Reply-To: <01013114591001.00585@martin> References: <01013021362802.04413@joachim> <01013114591001.00585@martin> Message-ID: <01013123295000.22927@joachim> Hi! > > For this solution we need a commercial Bible program, if it's possible > > for almost all plattforms the same program. > > I do not really understand this. How would the problem be solved by selling > the programs and modules? There is software contains the "commercial" > modules that users can buy, why should sword go the same way? IMHO bible societies want to make profit. If we sell a program (cheap) we could offer them some money for the license. Another point is that the Bibe societies and copyright holders are sceptical to PD-Soft and opensource ware. > > My solution for this would be to put Sword under LGPL, program a good > > Bible study program and sell the program. > > This will involve a lot of work, and the users of the opensource bible > programs like bibletime will not profit from it. Especially those who do > not have the money to buy a program. Hehe! This is a nice point. For sue I'd be working on this program and put lot's of existing code in it (from BibleTime). The program would be cheap to give everybody the chance to have the locked modules unlocked. But maybe there are better solutions. > What about another way to do it? For this aim it would not be necessary to > create and sell a program; it might be sufficient to change towards another > security architecture that can be published opensource; maybe just use > libraries like openssl etc. -- might be necessary anyway for not having to > use the same keys. > This way the encrypted modules would be safe; and users wanting them could > buy the modules while using their common sword frontend. Frontend programs > would not have to be changed. > > > The price should be enough to cover the expenses for module licenses > > etc., but it shouldn't by high. > > Only the commercial modules will be sold, the modules without copyright > > will be free. > > Martin Joachim -- Joachim Ansorg BibleTime - www.bibletime.de - info@bibletime.de BibleTime is an easy to use Bible study tool for KDE / Linux.