[sword-devel] Tagging verses and verse lists

Eeli Kaikkonen eekaikko at mail.student.oulu.fi
Mon Mar 9 08:02:11 MST 2009

Quoting Jonathan Morgan <jonmmorgan at gmail.com>:

> I'll add to this:
> f) Should support passages, not just individual verses (the definition
> of a passage is interesting - after looking at my notes that I take,
> I'm inclined to extend it to any collection of verses, not just a
> continuous passage, and will probably change it to that in BPBible
> 0.4.1).
> Feel free to dispute, but it makes sense to me.

It's quite difficult to follow others' thoughts in this subject. One  
important thing is to make difference between the techical  
implementation and an end user/UI need. For example, how

     1: Matt 1:2-5, John 1:3
     2: Luke 3:2-4, Rev 1:1


     1:Matt 1:2-5
     2: John 1:3
     3: Luke 3:2-4
     4: Rev 1:1

and List1

         1: Matt 1:2-5
         2: John 1:3
         1: Luke 3:2-4
         2: Rev 1:1

differ from each other in implementation and in a use case? I see  
List1 and List3 semantically identical, though they look different in  
UI. Even the List1 could be implemented with non-non-contiguous ( :) )  
passages - items 1 and 2 are just sublists.

>> So, is it time to resume the debate and bring it to a conclusion?
> I don't believe it is possible to conclude in practice (or even in
> theory), since that would be assuming that there is one solution that
> will suit all needs.  I can 95% guarantee that some of the things I
> want to do will not be interesting to others or just plain will not be
> implemented.  That being the case, I prefer to implement what I
> believe to be the right thing or just an idea I have in mind without
> being fettered by any compatibility or anything.  If it turns out to
> be a dead end then I have only wasted my time.

Whatever the implementation is, if we want the SWORD applications to  
interact with each other and be compatible - which they really should  
do - we have to create explicit conventions for  
bookmarks/tags/whatever exchange. A common technical implementation  
doesn't help at all if the frontends implement the ideas differently.  
For example, the frontends must not use other than plain text. They  
are not allowed to change the order of the bookmarks unless user wants  

It may be impossible to conclude in practice, either in technical or  
in UI level. At minimum we need some technical implemantion for  
bookmarks (I'm leaving "tags" out because I don't understand the  
concept well enough) AND explicit usage convention for bookmarks. The  
technical implementation can be used for whatever purpose, for example  
for storing app settings, but a SWORD Bookmark Compliant application  
must follow the written conventions to offer the users a user  
interface which allows using the bookmarks in other compliant apps.

> I take very strongly the "version independent
> unless asked otherwise" viewpoint.
I agree. In that case we need to take care of v11n. People want a  
specific passage, not whatever is in Book2:3 in some translation.

--Eeli Kaikkonen

More information about the sword-devel mailing list