[sword-devel] Alternate Versification
chrislit at crosswire.org
Sun May 3 14:46:36 MST 2009
In general, I'm planning for the addition of versification systems to
progress slowly and conservatively. So I've recommended to Troy that we
release 1.6.0 with the current set (KJV(A), NRSV(A) supersets,
Leningrad, & MT).
The main reason for this is that a v11n definition must remain stable
across releases or we will end up invalidating deployed content. Core
versification systems have proven extremely difficult to identify and
define. We could release an LXX v11n that matches Rahlfs' text, ignoring
discontinuous chapters, sub-verses, chapters not beginning with verse 1,
and all of the other ugliness. But that v11n definition wouldn't match
the versification of translations of the LXX which we think of as using
the LXX versification. The story is basically the same for the Vulgate,
except that it's difficult to even identify which "Vulgate" represents
the Vulgate v11n best since different editions have different v11ns.
In defining v11ns, I want a minimum of two independent sources who
define the same v11n (or I want to be able to identify which of the two
is erroneous and how). (The exception to this is the Leningrad v11n,
which for obvious reasons is defined from a single authoritative
document.) The NRSV & NRSVA were defined from 3 electronic sources and
compared against the printed text. The KJVA was defined from 2
electronic sources and compared against 2 printed sources and the NRSVA
Especially in a stable branch, we can't be defining and deploying
untested data, so the addition of more v11ns is probably out of the
question for 1.6.0. That's not to say that we couldn't release a 1.7.x
or even a 1.6.1 with additional v11ns a couple weeks from now. Producing
LXX-like, Vulgate-like, Original-like, and Russian Synodal v11n
definitions are all priorities (in no particular order), just not for
With respect to the Russian v11n present in MK, I don't think it will be
a candidate for inclusion. I would assume that the chapter & verse
counts for the OT & NT books that it includes are correct, but it omits
all books outside of the 66-book Protestant canon and those books it
includes are in the Protestant order, rather than that of the Russian
Synodal Bible. When we release a complete Russian v11n, it will be
trivial for the MK developer to re-import his data and have it be usable
(with the additional benefit of the book order being what more advanced
users expect). I have two fairly reliable sources for the Russian v11n
system and can verify against the canon definition from MK, so we can
probably expect this in the next unstable release.
Does that all sound reasonable?
David Haslam wrote:
> Bible translations for Central Asia generally follow the same versification
> scheme as the Russian Synodal Translation (RST), as is exemplified in the
> SWORD based Holy Bible program (MK) developed for the Institute of Bible
> Translation (IBT) for Russia/CIS. Moreover, most Slavic language
> translations (as used in Eastern Europe) follow the same versification
> I would like to make a strong plea that the first set of alternate
> versifications to be bundled should include this scheme.
> This would demonstrate our support for the work of IBT, and show that we are
> moving in the direction of co-operation and collaboration in the work of
> bringing the Gospel to the region of Central Asia and other countries that
> were once part of the former Soviet Union and its hegemony.
> MK already supports both RST and KJV versifications (seamlessly) but is not
> easily scalable to more than two schemes.
> For further information about MK, see
> The MK source code is available on-line at the same site.
> -- David
More information about the sword-devel