On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 12:55 AM, Eeli Kaikkonen <[email protected]> wrote: > Quoting DM Smith <[email protected]>: > >> >> >> In the light of versification and that many biblical references refer >> to specific works that might not be an installed module, let alone a >> module at all, what should the behavior be? For example a German >> commentary refers to a verse in Malachi that is not in the KJV v11n? >> Should we use a different variant of work that includes the >> versification: >> Bible.Vul.xxx:ref >> That way, if the xxx module is not installed, we can grab another Bible >> with the Vul versification. > > I can't say anything about the TEI markup, but the problem is more general. > For example, with bookmarks both the preferred module and the exact > versification may be needed. If there is only the module name, it may not be > installed (or even exist at all in the repositories) and it's impossible to > find the correct verse in any other module. Wherever a module name has been > used before the new v11n system, it should be thought whether it needs a > v11n marker or not. If there's any possibility that the module may be > replaced by another module in some useful way, there should be a way to > specify the v11n.
Whether or not there is a module in the versification of the reference, it will often by possible to map to a different module in a different versification (for example, showing Psalm 130:3 in Q rather than Psalm 130:2 in W). Whether this is desirable and understandable is another matter - I claim it can probably be made so by doing something very similar to Wikipedia (e.g. Psalm 130:3 - redirected from Psalm 130:2 in ...), and that it is frequently (possibly near universally) better to display references in a user's preferred Bible whether or not it has the same versification. Jon _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: [email protected] http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
