[sword-devel] Re: Offer help (portuguese module?)
dmsmith555 at yahoo.com
Wed May 31 20:34:29 MST 2006
As it stands, Chris has offered to do independent and impartial
evaluation of the texts and make a determination. Works for me. So, I
don't plan to respond more to this thread until he reports his findings.
On May 31, 2006, at 10:08 AM, Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
> DM Smith escreveu:
>> Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA wrote:
>>> DM Smith escreveu:
>>>> On May 5, 2006, at 5:11 AM, DArio Matos wrote:
>>> I have a problem with that. The Scriptures are far too
>>> important to anyone to touch. For example, the people who have
>>> been involved with PorAA up to now have shown too little respect
>>> for text integrity.
>> Ok, ok. Anyone is welcomed to take any public domain Bible and
>> create an eText from it provided that they have the utmost respect
>> for text integrity and will verify their work as having that
>> And I think Crosswire has a responsibility to not accept texts
>> that lack a certain level of quality, excepting extraordinary
>> circumstances. (It might be arguable that a work of mediocre
>> quality that is unique is better than nothing. Which appears to be
>> the reasoning behind keeping PorAA available.)
> That, and some reliance on some unspecified information by an
> unnamed source I really can’t fathom. It seems to be deference
> UnBounded if I am not mistaken, but I can’t understand such
> deference for a misnamed and corrupted text no one knows for sure
> where it came from, as several people attested already.
>>>> I think there are separate issues here.
>>>> One is a technical encoding issue that the module is incorrectly
>>>> Another is a textual quality issue. (missing/wrong text, ...)
>>>> A third is that of ownership(copyright) and proper naming.
>>>> The first one we can solve.
>>> It was solved already.
>> But it was not solved in isolation. It was the additional changes
>> that caused the effort to be turned away.
> Yet without these ‘additional changes’ the text has several
> important omissions.
>> Yes. Because it does not further cloud the copyright questions.
>> While PorAA might be in violation of copyright, as you contend it
>> is, we have not been contacted by a responsible party to contest it.
> If that is the problem (only this week this has been stated), I
> can ask them to. I just wonder if it is so hard to check it
> ourselves. If you want me to scan a few pages of my Revisada and
> send it here or publish somewhere I can do that.
>> Yes. Because fixing the textual issues such that it matches a
>> copyrighted work will infringe on copyright.
> Can you infringe more something that is infringed already?
> It already matches the work under copy rights even without the fixes.
>> The other way that it might be removed is that if the Portuguese
>> speaking people here would agree that it should not be available
>> based on quality issues.
> What irks me is that no one else here seems to have even looked at
> a copy of Versão Revisada, yet feels qualified to pontificate about
> PorAA being something different.
> Now that Chris has said he will try to do that, I’m assuaged.
>>>> The third requires negotiation with and permission from the
>>>> copyright owner.
>>> That is the course I am currently into.
>> Keep pressing on!! And I am assuming it is not for the module that
>> is currently hosted, but the one you created.
> They are the same, except for garbled and missing text, so I don’t
> see how different that would be.
> IBB hasn’t been responsive in the past, but their last answer
> actually gave me some hope, and I published it here already I think
> last year. I guess enough time passed for me to press them again.
> One thing I thought is that they are doing a further revision of
> Revisada, named ‘Almeida Século XXI’, under the coordination of
> Luís Alberto Teixeira SAYÃO, the same scholar who did our NVI
> (equivalent to your NIV). They already have the NT published. I
> hope once they have it all, perhaps they will relent on the older,
> but still useful, Revisada.
> But in the end, I think a better effort will be to incorporate the
> Tradução Brasileira.
> Leandro G Faria Corcete DUTRA xmpp:leandrod at jabber.org
> +55 (11) 5685 2219 Yahoo!: ymsgr:sendIM?lgcdutra
> +55 (11) 9406 7191 ICQ/AIM: aim:GoIM?screenname=61287803
> MSN: msnim:chat?contact=leandro at dutra.fastmail.fm
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
More information about the sword-devel