[sword-devel] How about the OT's standard versification at Sword ?

Krzysztof Bialas krzbia at ctm.gdynia.pl
Sun Apr 24 10:59:43 MST 2005

This is exactly the thing I was thinking about this weekend! I propose a 
TWiki space already dedicated for v11n as a perfect place to put such a 
document together.
Take a look here 
I'll also be more than happy to contribute to it!
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "DM Smith" <dmsmith555 w yahoo.com>
To: "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum" <sword-devel w crosswire.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: [sword-devel] How about the OT's standard versification at 
Sword ?

> Since this is a developers mailing list, I would like to suggest that we 
> create a whitepaper on v11n that outlines the goals, the scope, the 
> challenges/caveats and the high level design and perhaps low level design 
> that Sword will use. I think that such a paper can minimize this frequent 
> thread. I realize that this may need to wait until 1.5.8 is released.
> To be transparent, my motivation is to start work on it in JSword, to 
> minimize these long and mostly unproductive threads, IMHO (I think the 
> rest of the world calls them flame wars) and to participate in the design 
> of the mechanism.
> (These are not necessarily correct or complete, but let me put out 
> something as a starting point)
> Goals:
> 1) Accurately markup in the module the Book/Chapter/Verse (bcv) according 
> to the published Bible, using an authoritative, original source.
> 2) Create a lookup mechanism where by one can ask for a verse by any valid 
> bcv in the module. This would allow for the richness of the current 
> mechanism of specifying the bcv, including but not limited to OSIS forms 
> of the book, abbreviated forms of the book, alternate forms of the book, 
> locale specific forms of the book, ...
> 3) Facilitate parallel rendering of different v11n. This will require the 
> ability to map passage to passage between different v11n. (I deliberately 
> did not say verse here as verse boundaries may differ)
> 4) Facilitate red-lining of parallel passages in the same language. (Given 
> a base, show the markup of the changes necessary to create another 
> passage)
> 5) Semi-backward compatible. Earlier versions of the SwordAPI will be able 
> to access verses from modules with new v11n as represented in canon.h 
> today.
> A goal I would like to see, but may be too far out of scope.
> 6) a general purpose mechanism that can be extended to any book that can 
> be rendered hierarchically, e.g. 
> Work/Section/Chapter/Paragraph/Sentence... where the hierarchy is 
> particular to the work.
> The scope:
> New bible modules and new version of API.
> Challenges/caveats:
> 1) performance should be on par with existing modules based on canon.h.
> 2) new modules are not backward compatible with older SwordAPI. (Perhaps 
> they are partially compatible?)
> 3) old modules are compatible with new Sword API.
> Design:
> I have heard that there have been a few experiments so far with varying 
> degrees of success. Can people share what they were and what the strengths 
> and shortcomings of them were?
> _______________________________________________
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel w crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

More information about the sword-devel mailing list