[sword-devel] [osis-users] Some more footnote questions

Mike Hart just_mike_y at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 22 17:12:25 MST 2013

Hi Markku, 

[OSIS-USERS at crosswire.org] is technically the right place to ask this kind of question, but I can assure you that your questions will be well accepted and get much quicker responses if you post them to Sword-devel at crosswire.org instead of osis users.  

There has been some discussion about footnotes on the sword-devel list that may apply to your questions, so you may want to review the historical notes (if you can find it) of the sword-devel at crosswire.org list. 

Regarding your question, from a typesetting standpoint, in paper it would be bad practice, but in electronic probably the simplest way would be to duplicate the note, as long as this is limited activity.  If there are very many of these types of footnotes, you might think about footnoting at the last point and including a reference text at the start of the footnote text to describe the complete words of which the footnote applies from the verse. That is: 

Yhdelle tyttärelle hän antoi nimeksi Jemima, toiselle Kesia ja kolmannelle Keren-Puk*

*  Jemima, Kesia, Keren-puk : information about these folks is limited... but... 

If you ask on sword-devel you may get a much better technical solution, I mostly work with USFM and not with OSIS, which has a way to mark footnote markers independently of footnote texts. I don't think this works in OSIS. 

Mike Hart (just Mike)

 From: Markku Pihlaja <markku.pihlaja at sempre.fi>
To: osis-users at crosswire.org 
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 9:32 AM
Subject: [osis-users] Some more footnote questions

Hi again,

Our on-off project with the Finnish translation is on again, now really focusing on the very last details (I hope!). Working on annotations (footnotes) now, and coming across a few special cases which I'd appreciate your advice with.

Actually, I posted two questions about footnotes in December, but the remained unanswered. One of them did get its answer elsewhere, the other one is included here in these new questions.

Case 1) Several references to one footnote in a) one verse, b) two adjacent verses, c) two non-adjacent verses.
><verse sID="Job 42:14" osisID="Job.42.14" />Yhdelle tyttärelle hän antoi nimeksi Jemima*, toiselle Kesia*ja kolmannelle Keren-Puk*.<verse eID="Job 42:14" />
><verse sID="4. Moos. 34:5" osisID="Num.34.5" />kääntyy sitten Egyptin rajapuroa kohti ja jatkuu sitä pitkin mereen.*<verse eID="4. Moos. 34:5" /></p>
><p><verse sID="4. Moos. 34:6" osisID="Num.34.6" />»Läntisenä rajana on Suurimeri rantoineen.*Se on teidän rajanne lännen puolella.
>For example in Matt.18.24 and Matt.18.28.

All three asterisks in a) refer to the same footnote that explains the meaning of each name. In b), both the asterisk in 34:5 and the asterisk in 34:6 refer to the same footnote, and in c), there is an asterisk both in verse 24 and verse 28, but one common footnote for both.

Should I just place one note tag for example at the last or first asterisk? In a future implementation where you click on the asterisk to see the footnote, that would then leave the other asterisks unlinked and inactive. Duplicating the note would certainly not be good practice, would it?

Case 2) How would you form the osisID for the footnote in 
- case 1a)  
- case 1b)
- case 1c)
I believe the osisRef is obvious in all cases.

My osisID format for a normal footnote is for example "John.1.39!note". Depending on the solution to case 1), the osisID for that might be identical to the normal case. But how about 2) and 3)?
 "Num.34.5 Num.34.6!note" looks like the note is just in verse 6, "Num.34.5!note Num.34.6!note" on the other hand looks like two notes. Or should I ignore (in the osisID) the fact that the note refers to a longer range and just use (the first?) one of the verses where it is placed - and let osisRef take care of that extra info about several verses? Or do still something else?

Case 3) If I have a footnote that explains a range two (OR MORE) adjacent verses and obviously has the asterisk once somewhere in the range, how should the markup look?

<verse sID="Matt. 23:7" osisID="Matt.23.7" />ja ovat hyvillään, kun ihmiset toreilla tervehtivät heitä ja kutsuvat heitä rabbiksi*.<verse eID="Matt. 23:7" /></p>
><p><verse sID="Matt. 23:8" osisID="Matt.23.8" />»Älkää te antako kutsua itseänne rabbiksi, sillä teillä on vain yksi opettaja ja te olette kaikki veljiä.<verse eID="Matt. 23:8" />

Here, the note applies to the whole range of verses 7 and 8, even though the asterisk is just at the end of 7.

I'd guess the osisRef for the note to be "Matt.23.7-Matt.23.8", but what about the osisID? Should it contain the info about the longer range or should it just contain the one verse it happens to be positioned in (and again let the osisRef indicate the info about several verses)?

Case 4) As in 3), but the note explains two (really) separate verses instead of a contiguous range.

Exod.33.19 and Exod.34.5 both talk about "Jahve", and the footnote explains that name. However, the asterisk is only in 33.19. In a print Bible, the footnote for 33.19 at the bottom of the page mentions both verses.

Also, a footnote for Rom.1.1 and Rom.1.7 (marked by an asterisk only at 1.7) explains that the beginning of 1.7 has been moved to end of 1.1.

Case 5) The asterisk for the footnote is inside a title before (and outside) the actual verse or range it refers to.

<title type="sub" level="4">Uudenvuodenjuhla*</title>
><p><verse sID="3. Moos. 23:23" osisID="Lev.23.23" />Herra sanoi Moosekselle:<verse eID="3. Moos. 23:23" />...

I guess this is a trivial case, just checking: I'd use osisID "Lev.23.23!note" and osisRef that indicates the range that the note refers to.

Once again, thanks in advance!


osis-users mailing list
osis-users at crosswire.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/attachments/20130222/36db0aa5/attachment.html>

More information about the sword-devel mailing list