[sword-devel] Module Errors
ransom1982 at gmail.com
Wed Nov 26 11:55:58 MST 2008
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Peter von Kaehne <refdoc at gmx.net> wrote:
> Matthew Talbert wrote:
>>> General historic policy at CrossWire is: we will not be an authoritative
>>> source repository.
> I think there is some misunderstanding which keeps creeping up in this
> kind of discussions.
> Yes CrossWire is not a source of texts. But we regularly do create some
> kind of import format which is the last step from xxx2mod. And keeping
> this around to allow some easy changes is what we should do.
> The round trip is now possible - but is it perfect? And are improvements
> via round trip acceptable? If not then the last step before module
> creation is a useful thing to have.
> for many of us (myself included) teh creation of a module us a
> nightmare. But to fix something simple within an existing XML text is
> something we are able. Keeping import format round allows people like us
> - who know what we are doing, but perform on not too high a level - to
> be employed usefully.
> And then there are the multitude of dodgy PD texts where we are able to
> make OSIS shine, quite irrespective of original source text etc. Markup
> of WoJ, insertion of strongs, etc. You have it done once for KJV2003, we
> should be able to the same for FarsiOPV, Luther1545 etc. But starting
> always from scratch appears pointless in these matters.
I definitely agree with all of this. I think an issue is that for a
programmer, if there are 100 occurrences of a problem, the programmer
will write a script. Thus we hear repeated here constantly, modify the
import script and we'll update. However, non-programmers such as Peter
(who's becoming less of a non-programmer all the time :) would
probably just open the file in a text editor, and search 100 times and
perform the edit manually. You only have to look at wikipedia to see
that this approach is successful.
More information about the sword-devel