[sword-devel] Lexical fields

refdoc@gmx.net refdoc at gmx.net
Sat Aug 24 10:17:01 MST 2013

Lexica in sword are not build with OSIS. 

Sent from my HTC

----- Reply message -----
From: "Timothy S. Nelson" <wayland at wayland.id.au>
To: "Chris Burrell" <chris at burrell.me.uk>
Cc: "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum" <sword-devel at crosswire.org>
Subject: [sword-devel] Lexical fields
Date: Sat, Aug 24, 2013 15:50

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013, Chris Burrell wrote:

> For our lexicon, we don't use SWORD modules because they aren't flexible > enough. The main drawback was the lack of segregation of different parts of > data.

	I'm assuming that by "Segregation", you mean that they didn't have a wide enough variety of fields in which data could be encoded?

> I'm not an expert but I didn't think the current OSIS would let you do what > I attached in the previous files, such that you could retrieve them > separately. We also wanted control of how the indexing would happen.

	Yes, I suspect you're right.

> On the other hand, STEP's datasets are all based off Lucene, so there's no > reason why a new 'flexible' Sword module format couldn't be created.

	I guess that's what I'd like :).  In theory, OSIS allows multiple indices; AFAICT SWORD doesn't support this.


| Name: Tim Nelson                 | Because the Creator is,        |
| E-mail: wayland at wayland.id.au    | I am                           |

Version 3.12
GCS d+++ s+: a- C++$ U+++$ P+++$ L+++ E- W+ N+ w--- V- PE(+) Y+>++ PGP->+++ R(+) !tv b++ DI++++ D G+ e++>++++ h! y-

sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/attachments/20130824/b27e4285/attachment.html>

More information about the sword-devel mailing list