[sword-devel] Concerns about Alternate Versification
eekaikko at mail.student.oulu.fi
Tue Jan 6 03:14:36 MST 2009
Familie von Kaehne wrote:
> Not correct. The TSK or any other reference work will have used an
> underlying particular versification - even if this is not documented.
Not only that, but TSK uses explicitly several versifications. It refers
to LXX with LXX versification. It's indicated by "book ch:v (LXX)" or
something similar. This is true at least for the paper print. If this is
not taken care of by module makers - as it most probably has not - the
module creates faulty results when used in an application. For a high
quality module we should detect all versifications and change the
references accordingly, either with KJV v11n or with mapped references.
And the only "high" quality solution for me would be to keep the
original printed text and use mapped references internally. This means
that we need a way to use several v11ns in OSIS and in software
TSK is independent of any specific translation, but it's really
dependent on couple of versification schemes. If we want to discuss
about this, it's important to make distinction between the text and the
outer appear of the reference - and the real reference. For example, we
have a KJV verse Ps 56:1:
"Be merciful unto me, O God: for man would swallow me up; he fighting
daily oppresseth me."
But in some other translations the same text is Ps 56:2. So this can be
referenced as "Ps 56:1" within its original context, or "Ps 56:1 (KJV)"
or "Ps 56:2 (OtherTrans)" in general context. But we are speaking of
techical reference implementation here, not about any printed text. In
printed text "Ps 56:2 (OtherTrans)" means always the text of the
OtherTrans, it's not a technical reference to any translation.
So, we should define our terms. There are at least three:
- "Biblical text" or "text of a translation", e.g. "Be merciful..."
- "Reference text" or "end user reference" (the visible text of a
reference, e.g. "Ps 56:2"), maybe in generalized form.
- "Technical reference" or "reference implementation" or "software
reference" which always includes the versification scheme. Independent
of any visible appearance and book/ch/v indicators. Can be used to point
to any translation if there is mapping and the translation scheme is known.
As Peter said there are at least two use cases for different
versifications: to see the reference texts as they are in the original
printed version, and to refer to any work/translation generally. If we
would need the first one only, it would be enough to have a mechanism
which uses blindly any versification. The second one is needed if we
want to use several modules together and yet provide the original
versifications, and that's much more difficult. The need for mapping is
so obvious it shouldn't even need a mention.
There are difficulties with the frontends, too. They haven't been
discussed at all yet IIRC.
Should the frontend give possibility to change the default v11n? Users
may have accustomed to a certain scheme and would like to use it for all
modules so that they can use their favorite translation and still find
references in other modules easily.
Should it be possible to use the module v11ns? When user has KJV open he
would use KJV v11n and when he uses LXX he would use LXX v11n.
Should the original v11ns be somehow visible even when some common v11n
How about parallel views? Should them use the KJV v11n or the given
default v11n? Or should it be possible to select one of the used v11ns?
Have the developers already thought about these? Have you decided to use
some specific solution? I would like to hear.
More information about the sword-devel