[sword-devel] Which is preferred in OSIS Bibles? bookGroup or x-testament?

Greg Hellings greg.hellings at gmail.com
Mon Feb 13 11:51:54 MST 2012

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:36 PM, DM Smith <dmsmith at crosswire.org> wrote:
> On 02/13/2012 01:16 PM, David Haslam wrote:
>> That being the case, it prompts the question,
>> Why does mod2osis use type="x-testament" ?
> I'm not really sure what the utility of mod2osis is at all. The transforms
> of ThML and GBF to OSIS are very incomplete. It is best when processing an
> OSIS module. Every now and then there are discussions here regarding some
> shortcoming of this utility. At this point, I think it is abandon-ware.

This is only because I have never been given commit privileges to it.
I have made extensive changes and updates to it and submitted patches
multiple times but those have always been ignored. I've also
completely rewritten it two separate times to use something other than
a single monolithic for-loop, and both of those times I have been

Ergo, four times I have achieved mod2osis -> osis2mod -> DC ad nauseum
on the KJV 2006 module, including OSIS validation at each step and
verification that both the plain text output and the HTML rendered
output was identical between the round trip. Each time that
accomplishment has been ignored. The round-trip produces validation
errors when the original module import has errors in it (there were
some </lg> elements without corresponding <lg> elements in one or two
modules), but when I've reported those I got a, "Thanks, that's great,
but we can't do anything about it" response because we lack the
original OSIS files.

Thus it is only abandon-ware because I was never given commit
privileges to it despite repeated requests (or, if I was given write
privileges it was never told me). I have since deleted the git and bzr
branches where I was working on mod2osis because I gave up hope of
ever being allowed to adopt it.


More information about the sword-devel mailing list