On 03/07/2012 02:46 PM, Kahunapule Michael Johnson wrote:
On 03/06/2012 04:12 PM, Jonathan Morgan wrote:


On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Kahunapule Michael Johnson <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    On 03/06/2012 12:47 AM, Jonathan Morgan wrote:

         1. You accurately preserve all of the original text and
            punctuation (including quotation punctuation) exactly as
            it was in the original USFM. This involves the complete
            process from module creation to display in all front
            ends. This is an absolute requirement with respect to
            the canonical text. If this condition isn't met, then I
            don't have permission to convert these Scriptures to
            Sword format, nor do you have such permission.


    I'm afraid I do not understand how either you or CrossWire can
    ensure that *all* front ends display all text correctly.  I have
    no idea from your descriptions whether BPBible or any other
    frontends would meet the requirements currently.  However, even
    if they did it is conceivable that a new front end is created
    which does not meet the requirements.  Does this mean that
    CrossWire immediately loses permission to distribute the text
    for use in any of the front ends? (including all the front ends
    that are compliant, of course).

    That is a very good question-- one that I really don't want to
    have to raise with the copyright owners!

    At a minimum, noncompliant front ends may not use the texts if
    they cannot do so without corrupting them.


A couple of things:
1. Non-compliant frontends do not use the text: users do.
2. Non-compliant frontends do not distribute modules: CrossWire (or some other organisation) does.

Blame-shifting is not productive. Quality control at all stages in the complete system from Bible translator to user is productive.



    I'm not talking about getting all of the formatting correct. I'm
    just talking about exactly preserving all text and punctuation of
    the canonical text. If a front end cannot do that, it should be
    withdrawn from public distribution, as it is clearly a threat to
    our ability to distribute Scriptures. Actually, there is a
    greater threat that copyrights: the fear of God. I wouldn't want
    to be caught dead or alive corrupting the Holy Bible. I would
    think that you wouldn't, either. It is a fearsome thing to fall
    into the hands of God when He is angry.


All of this assumes knowledge of errors. Unless you manually test every verse of every Bible in every frontend, some could display a result different from what you expected. I know that at different times I have seen some unusual bugs.
A few (real world) cases:
1. A bug in BPBible meant that when Strong's Numbers were displayed, some verses in the Chinese would not display. 2. A bug in encoding meant opening a Bible to a particular chapter would raise an error message.
3. Incorrect font usage meant that the text displayed completely wrongly.

When these bugs are encountered and reported, we will fix them, but I cannot write (consistently) bug-free code and I don't think I've ever met a developer who can. Certainly a fairly high percentage of the module rendering errors that are reported to me in BPBible are caused by modules I had never used (often in languages I did not know), and where for whatever reason my assumptions were wrong.

I understand the limitations of imperfect human programmers. What I expect is that:

  * Each part of the whole Bible study software system from
    translation to module creation to back end development to front
    end display is carefully designed to correctly handle Bible texts
    without corruption.
  * Reasonable care is taken by everyone involved to ensure that the
    implementations are correct.
  * Reasonable testing is done.
  * High priority is given to correcting any problems that result in
    corruption of the text.

This is not unreasonable, is it?

Responding as a module creator...

I understand and share your desire to have Bible translations rendered faithfully (not corrupted - we're not talking about SWORD corrupting your data but rather failing to render it faithfully). And I think your expectations above are reasonable. The developers work hard to make sure the software works correctly. I think the conversation about headings in the past few days has shown this. However, at the end of the day, the module creator is responsible to ensure that these expectations are met.

You are responsible to make sure that your markup produces the desired result and that adequate testing is done. I suggest testing as broadly as you can, at a minimum testing in BibleTime, Xiphos, BibleDesktop, and BibleCS. I think that should cover the main rendering methods.

If something essential is not yet supported, you can lobby for it and refrain from submitting a module until your desired markup is supported. After you submit a module, if you notice a bug, you can lobby to have it fixed or offer a fix yourself. If the bug is serious enough, you can ask for the module to be taken off the server until there is a fix.

But consider this—where else can you publish your translations? I had a conversation with a leading for-profit Bible software company executive about getting Vietnamese Bibles into their software. Now, Vietnamese is among the top 20 most-spoken languages in the world (i.e., a real market), but they were not very interested, even if I volunteered to help. Crosswire does an amazing service to minority languages by making them available through a free distribution network.

Daniel

_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: [email protected]
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

Reply via email to