[sword-devel] Concerns about Alternate Versification

Greg Hellings greg.hellings at gmail.com
Tue Jan 6 02:58:03 MST 2009

On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Jonathan Morgan <jonmmorgan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Chris Little <chrislit at crosswire.org> wrote:
>> Basically, alternate versification support is phase 1. Mapping between
>> versifications is phase 2.
> And I'm saying I don't believe it is ready for use without phase 2.

And what I heard when you say that is that you don't believe Genbooks
are good for Phase 1, however all your arguments are that Phase 2
isn't implemented yet.  Genbooks are excellent for this type of thing
- they already exist in SWORD, they allow for arbitrary key content,
they allow for each Bible to have its own system of versification...
which is the right way to implement a Bible.  Having any sort of
programmer-dictated requirement for versification is inherently wrong.

Providing the mapping is, except perhaps for those versions that do
adhere to the major "standards," a job that only the module creator
can do.  Once that is implemented, all of your concern over whose
reference this is and what it points to can run through a reference
translator if the front-end developer desires or can be left in its
provided form and placed into the user's preferred module - regardless
of whether the results make sense.  That problem is, I believe, best
left to the front-end developer to decide.  Getting module-creator
preferred target module should come from the library, but whether or
not to use that is up to the front-end.

More information about the sword-devel mailing list