<div dir="ltr">Thank you for an answer. <div><br></div><div>The problem is that now it is impossible to a genbook module work both with libsword or jsword. As of now, not one genbook that uses internal references with '/' is functional with jsword. I think that with regards to the points you made it would be best to make jsword use '/' as well such that libsword and jsword are compatible, and suggest a change to OSIS standard. </div><div><br></div><div>I would like to hear thoughts from DM Smith. We had some discussion about this issue with him in <a href="https://github.com/crosswire/jsword/pull/98">https://github.com/crosswire/jsword/pull/98</a> . </div><div><br></div><div>Best regards,</div><div>Tuomas</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2015-06-22 12:38 GMT+03:00 Troy A. Griffitts <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:scribe@crosswire.org" target="_blank">scribe@crosswire.org</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi Tuomas,<br>
<br>
Thank you for the patch. Unfortunately, it is not this easy. Your<br>
patch would invalidate all current genbook modules. I believe we've<br>
discussed this here on sword-devel in the past. I can't remember the<br>
discussion, but I believe it was to either allow '/' in the OSIS spec or<br>
violate the OSIS spec for now.<br>
<br>
The problem right now is a few fold:<br>
<br>
1) We supported GenBooks before OSIS and in other formats and decided on<br>
'/' separation of levels then. Our key syntax. We need to discuss what<br>
this mean for our other markup formats. Karl Kleinpaste would be idea<br>
to speak with as he develops GenBook modules in other than OSIS markups.<br>
<br>
2) We do no yet support an escape control sequence to allow the literal<br>
division character to be included in the path. There are far fewer<br>
literal '/' characters in book sections then there are '.' characters.<br>
We can change the few for now to something else. The ultimate solution<br>
is to support an escape sequence, which we've also discussed on<br>
sword-devel quite a bit.<br>
<br>
3) We have MANY genbook modules out in the wild, being used by the user<br>
base of our many different application and can't invalidate all of their<br>
genbooks. We need an upgrade path for all current modules now or better<br>
a backward compatible patch until current genbook modules have an<br>
upgrade path.<br>
<br>
Hope this makes sense. Thank you for spending time talking about the<br>
issue and being willing to get involved. If you'd like to look into the<br>
items above, we can work our way toward a solution.<br>
<br>
Is there a hindrance you're trying to solve with module development or<br>
something else we might help you with in the meantime? I believe DM<br>
Smith keeps a patch OSIS Schema around with all of our suggested updates<br>
to the Schema, which likely allows '/' for genbooks. He probably can<br>
post that if your issue is validating Schema validating a genbook.<br>
<br>
Welcome! It's nice to have you,<br>
<br>
Troy<br>
<div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 06/22/2015 09:23 AM, Tuomas Airaksinen wrote:<br>
> Hi all,<br>
><br>
> Currently in libsword apps, referenses to genbook nodes need to be<br>
> written in form osisRef="BookId:rootnode/branchnode/leafnode". This is<br>
> wrong, because OSIS xml scheme does not allow '/' character in<br>
> osisRefs. Instead, osisRef should be in form,<br>
> osisRef="BookId:rootnode.branchnode.leafnode". Also <a href="http://www.crosswire.org/wiki/OSIS_Genbooks" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.crosswire.org/wiki/OSIS_Genbooks</a><br>
> suggest the latter form.<br>
><br>
> See also discussion on <a href="https://github.com/crosswire/jsword/pull/98" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/crosswire/jsword/pull/98</a><br>
><br>
> Attached is the patch to fix this issue. I tested this with Xiphos and<br>
> it seems to work fine.<br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
> Best regards, Tuomas<br>
><br>
> ps.<br>
> just a little humble suggestion, *please* move to github. It would be a<br>
> lot more convenient and easier to get involved to development via<br>
> pullrequests than this way.<br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div>> _______________________________________________<br>
> sword-devel mailing list: <a href="mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org">sword-devel@crosswire.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel</a><br>
> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page<br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
sword-devel mailing list: <a href="mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org">sword-devel@crosswire.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel</a><br>
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">T: Tuomas</div>
</div></div>