[sword-devel] USFM conformance in usfm2osis.py
Kahunapule Michael Johnson
kahunapule at mpj.cx
Wed Aug 1 12:09:48 MST 2012
On 07/31/2012 04:16 PM, Chris Little wrote:
> My new usfm2osis.py script is progressing quite nicely. I've got it generating valid OSIS from one Bible that uses a very minimal set of USFM elements. At the moment, I'm working to make it process all tags present within the USFM versions of the WEB and RV, and this has raised an issue.
> I've been working primarily with the USFM reference from UBS ICAP, treating it as a sort of specification. My question is: should this new utility accept USFM that does not conform to the reference at UBS ICAP?
> Should it accept & interpret USFM tags that are not present in the reference?
> One specific example is that the WEB uses \fqa*, which is obviously intended as an end-tag version of \fqa (used to mark alternate translations). But the USFM reference does not identify this as a valid end-tag, by my reading.
> So... should we...
> a) Make the new utility accept non-conformant USFM (from the perspective of the USFM reference). I'm leery of this, since one of my reasons for writing the new utility was to keep it pristinely spec-conformant and I have a feeling we might start incorporating tags and syntax that are less obviously interpretable than \fqa*.
Yes, in the case of \fqa* and other tags that were actually historically part of USFM. The alternative is excessive unnecessary handling of "exceptions". At one point, the USFM standard could have reasonably been interpreted such that all "character" styles had an explicit end marker, and by extension, the implicit ability within the markup to support character style nesting or stacking. However, because Paratext never supported that, simply starting another style, such as \ft in the case of \fqa, ended any
other active character style.
In a future iteration of USFM, character style stacking will be allowed with a different syntax, with "+" inserted between the "\" and the opening character style indicator. This will also likely require explicit end markers to come back, at least when the "+" syntax is used.
In addition to the USFM specification at http://paratext.ubs-translations.org/about/usfm, Paratext itself is a defacto part of the standard, and it has no problem with reading \fqa*. It just doesn't generate it.
I really didn't notice the fact that \fqa* quietly disappeared from the USFM standard until now. Bibledit still supports it, as do my USFM-handling routines.
> b) Write a separate utility to convert common and interpretable non-conformant tags/syntax to conformant markup.
This could work. For example, a global search and replace of "\fq*" with "\ft " (including the space) would take care of that one marker, resulting in USFM markup that conforms better to USFM 2.35. More generally, "\f?*" could be replaced with "\ft ", where ? is a wild card and * is not. Likewise, "\x?*" could be replaced with "\xt ".
> c) Add a command-line switch to usfm2osis.py so that it performs a pre-processing step of making non-conformant tags/syntax into conformant markup. (This would be the same as option b, but would place everything in a single utility.)
It is unlikely that character style end marker processing all the time would cause a problem, leaving no reason to turn the switch off. However, if you had processing for common mistakes, like writing \q where \pi belongs, that might better be put in an optional preprocessor.
> d) Punt on the issue, and let those performing conversion deal with non-conformant markup on a case by case basis.
That is a reasonable alternative for cases where the intentions of the markup are unclear or where the nonconformities are not consistent. A great example of a place to punt is in the \z namespace. There is really no way to know if a custom marker has an end marker or not, or if text associated with it should be ignored or not, unless you get project-specific instructions with the marker. Likewise, some people make up their own custom markers that don't start with a z. There are also markups that predate USFM.
I hope this helps...
More information about the sword-devel