[sword-devel] linking syntax
chrislit at crosswire.org
Fri Nov 28 23:16:47 MST 2008
If we may take a moment to actually discuss development...
I think we may have a problem....
Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
> support for external links:
> There is currently no programmatic features in the engine which help or
> hinder external links. Historically there has been a common conceptual
> agreement that a 'reference' is to that of a 'general Bible'.
> This needs to change, we all agree.
> The agreed extension is to:
> implement support for the key prefix on OSIS tag <reference
> osisRef="module:key"> syntax.
> use the prefix to specify a sword module.
> determine a set of meta modules like:
> default the prefix, if absent to 'bible:' so current modules still work.
> None of this requires engine changes, but rather that we extend the
> historical conceptual idea of a reference beyond bible:key.
Meanwhile, the OSIS manual says:
A reference element was used in the note example above. To refresh your
memory, here is just the reference element part of that example:
<reference osisRef="Ezra.4.6">Ezra 4:6<reference>
Note there is no osisWork prefix, that is no ‘name:’ in from of
‘Ezra.4.6’ in the osisRef attribute. That may be for one of two reasons:
First, that is being supplied by the osisWork default, i.e., it is a
reference in this work. Or, the osisWork prefix may have been set by the
the workPrefix element in the header element of the document.
In either case, if you want to point to another text, you must declare
that in a work element and use the value of the osisWork attribute from
it to make references to it.
The two positions appear to be in conflict with respect to the default
workID. The spec says the default workID is either specified by the
header or the current document. Troy suggests that the default should
always be Bible:. I think my own encoding practice, when it even makes a
difference, follows the manual's standard.
So, do we follow Troy's suggestion and take default to be Bible: when no
workID is specified? Or do we follow the OSIS spec?
I have a feeling the former is probably the more pragmatic approach,
precisely because it doesn't break existing content (though I'm not sure
either approach would break anything in the public repository). But we
need to make a decision on this for our own encoding, importer, and
More information about the sword-devel