date:20190113

Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter

2019-01-13 Thread David Haslam

Aside: It turns out  that 13 Psalms actually have a Second Version.

Became clear over the weekend while I was editing the SFM file.

David

Sent from ProtonMail Mobile

On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 20:44, Peter von Kaehne  wrote:

> Ok, this is my interrim solution which I plan. I think it should work
>
> I will create a double module - both confs in one file, second version
> in the second (sub)module. Then I will create reference links from one
> to the other at the header of each psalm with two versions. And back
> again.
>
> Peter
>
> On Sun, 2019-01-13 at 12:51 -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
>> A few thoughts...
>> How do we envisage a frontend displaying this text? Do we expect
>> each frontend to have special logic for displaying if there is a
>> variation of the chapter? Consider all the various display cases:
>> single Bible view, parallel Bible view, search results, etc... For
>> example, if this module is included in a parallel display with a
>> second module (say, Hebrew), what do we expect to happen if a chapter
>> is displayed which includes an alternative chapter?
>> I don't have any good ideas which avoid frontends including special
>> logic for something like this, which isn't reasonable. We do have at
>> least one other scenario which is similar: Rahlfs' LXX, which
>> includes alternate traditions for books. We also struggled with the
>> best way to capture and display this. More difficult, Ralhfs uses a
>> differing versification for alternate book traditions. We did proof
>> of concepts with adding Alt books to an LXX versification, allowing
>> LXX Book versifications to have enough chapter, book max to cover
>> either tradition, creating a single module, having 2 modules-- the
>> second having only the alternate traditions. I don't recall where we
>> left off on that or what strategy our current Rahlfs Bible uses. Our
>> CATSS LXX GenBook includes book traditions as 'A' and 'B',
>> http://crosswire.org/study/bookdisplay.jsp?mod=LXXM
>> But that just punts on the problem and uses GenBook because doesn't
>> need to solve the problem of relating 'A' and 'B' together somehow.
>> Just some thoughts,
>> Troy
>>
>> On 1/13/19 8:22 AM, David Haslam wrote:
>> > The best solution may be to have two SMP modules each with 150
>> > Psalms; one to have the V1s and the other to have the V2s for the
>> > Psalms with 2 versions.
>> >
>> > NB. The canonical title should also be supplied for the Version 2.
>> >
>> > These Psalms could be given an extra technical note to explain
>> > further.
>> >
>> > 138 Psalms would appear exactly the same in both modules, but the
>> > convenience more than compensates for the duplications.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > David
>> >
>> > Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 14:17, David Haslam 
>> > wrote:
>> > > In response to DM, I think that's the wrong approach, as it would
>> > > be confusing to mix two different metres for how the same Psalm
>> > > was metrified in English.
>> > > What's required is whole chapters as 2 different variants.
>> > >
>> > > There are 25 lines containing the word 'version':
>> > > s2 First Version
>> > > s2 Second Version
>> > > s2 First Version (S.M.)
>> > > s2 Second Version
>> > > s2 First Version
>> > > s2 Second Version
>> > > s2 First Version
>> > > s2 Second Version
>> > > s2 First Version
>> > > s2 Second Version
>> > > s2 First Version
>> > > s2 Second Version
>> > > s2 First Version - this version was retained from the 1562
>> > > English and 1564 Scottish Psalters. It is by William Kethe.
>> > > s2 Second Version
>> > > cl Psalm 102 There is also a Long Metre version below *
>> > > s2 First Version
>> > > s2 Second Version
>> > > s2 First Version (8.7.8.7. Iambic)
>> > > s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.8.8.) This is a slightly modified
>> > > version of the Psalm as it first appeared in the Scottish Psalter
>> > > of 1564 *
>> > > s2 First Version (C.M.)
>> > > s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.D.)
>> > > s2 First Version
>> > > s2 Second Version
>> > > s2 First version
>> > > s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.8.8.)
>> > >
>> > > As you can see, one of these instances is simply within a note.
>> > > So there are in fact 12 Psalms that have a second metrical
>> > > version.
>> > >
>> > > Best regards,
>> > >
>> > > David
>> > >
>> > > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
>> > >
>> > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>> > > On Saturday, 12 January 2019 13:55, ref...@gmx.net <
>> > > ref...@gmx.net> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Ah, yes, sorry
>> > > >
>> > > > Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>> > > > autocorrects.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >  Original Message 
>> > > > Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric
>> > > > Psalter
>> > > > From: David Haslam
>> > > > To: DM Smith
>> > > > CC: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > NB. Peter's initial message contained a broken link to
>> > > > >

Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter

2019-01-13 Thread Peter von Kaehne

Ok, this is my interrim solution which I plan. I think it should work

I will create a double module - both confs in one file, second version
in the second (sub)module. Then I will create reference links from one
to the other at the header of each psalm with two versions. And back
again. 

Peter




On Sun, 2019-01-13 at 12:51 -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
> A few thoughts...
> How do we envisage a frontend displaying this text?  Do we expect
> each frontend to have special logic for displaying if there is a
> variation of the chapter?  Consider all the various display cases:
> single Bible view, parallel Bible view, search results, etc...  For
> example, if this module is included in a parallel display with a
> second module (say, Hebrew), what do we expect to happen if a chapter
> is displayed which includes an alternative chapter?
> I don't have any good ideas which avoid frontends including special
> logic for something like this, which isn't reasonable.  We do have at
> least one other scenario which is similar: Rahlfs' LXX, which
> includes alternate traditions for books.  We also struggled with the
> best way to capture and display this.  More difficult, Ralhfs uses a
> differing versification for alternate book traditions.  We did proof
> of concepts with adding Alt books to an LXX versification, allowing
> LXX Book versifications to have enough chapter, book max to cover
> either tradition, creating a single module, having 2 modules-- the
> second having only the alternate traditions.  I don't recall where we
> left off on that or what strategy our current Rahlfs Bible uses.  Our
> CATSS LXX GenBook includes book traditions as 'A' and 'B',
> http://crosswire.org/study/bookdisplay.jsp?mod=LXXM
> But that just punts on the problem and uses GenBook because doesn't
> need to solve the problem of relating 'A' and 'B' together somehow.
> Just some thoughts,
> Troy  
> 
> On 1/13/19 8:22 AM, David Haslam wrote:
> > The best solution may be to have two SMP modules each with 150
> > Psalms; one to have the V1s and the other to have the V2s for the
> > Psalms with 2 versions. 
> > 
> > NB. The canonical title should also be supplied for the Version 2.
> > 
> > These Psalms could be given an extra technical note to explain
> > further. 
> > 
> > 138 Psalms would appear exactly the same in both modules, but the
> > convenience more than compensates for the duplications. 
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> > 
> > David
> > 
> > Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
> > 
> > 
> > On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 14:17, David Haslam 
> > wrote: 
> > > In response to DM, I think that's the wrong approach, as it would
> > > be confusing to mix two different metres for how the same Psalm
> > > was metrified in English.
> > > What's required is whole chapters as 2 different variants.
> > > 
> > > There are 25 lines containing the word 'version':
> > > s2 First Version
> > > s2 Second Version
> > > s2 First Version (S.M.)
> > > s2 Second Version
> > > s2 First Version
> > > s2 Second Version
> > > s2 First Version
> > > s2 Second Version
> > > s2 First Version
> > > s2 Second Version
> > > s2 First Version
> > > s2 Second Version
> > > s2 First Version - this version was retained from the 1562
> > > English and 1564 Scottish Psalters. It is by William Kethe.
> > > s2 Second Version
> > > cl Psalm 102 There is also a Long Metre version below *
> > > s2 First Version
> > > s2 Second Version
> > > s2 First Version (8.7.8.7. Iambic)
> > > s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.8.8.) This is a slightly modified
> > > version of the Psalm as it first appeared in the Scottish Psalter
> > > of 1564 *
> > > s2 First Version (C.M.)
> > > s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.D.)
> > > s2 First Version
> > > s2 Second Version
> > > s2 First version
> > > s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.8.8.)
> > > 
> > > As you can see, one of these instances is simply within a note. 
> > > So there are in fact 12 Psalms that have a second metrical
> > > version.
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> > > 
> > > David
> > > 
> > > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
> > > 
> > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > > On Saturday, 12 January 2019 13:55, ref...@gmx.net <
> > > ref...@gmx.net> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Ah, yes, sorry
> > > > 
> > > > Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
> > > > autocorrects.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  Original Message 
> > > > Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric
> > > > Psalter
> > > > From: David Haslam 
> > > > To: DM Smith 
> > > > CC: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > NB. Peter's initial message contained a broken link to
> > > > > https://github.com/refdoc/The-Scottish-Metric-Psalter-1650 
> > > > > 
> > > > > The repo is now at
> > > > > https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/scottish-psalter-1650
> > > > > 
> > > > > i.e. In our public facing location for PD text development.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > 
> > > > > David
> > > > > 
> > > > > Sent with ProtonMail

Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter

2019-01-13 Thread Troy A. Griffitts

A few thoughts...

How do we envisage a frontend displaying this text?  Do we expect each
frontend to have special logic for displaying if there is a variation of
the chapter?  Consider all the various display cases: single Bible view,
parallel Bible view, search results, etc...  For example, if this module
is included in a parallel display with a second module (say, Hebrew),
what do we expect to happen if a chapter is displayed which includes an
alternative chapter?

I don't have any good ideas which avoid frontends including special
logic for something like this, which isn't reasonable.  We do have at
least one other scenario which is similar: Rahlfs' LXX, which includes
alternate traditions for books.  We also struggled with the best way to
capture and display this.  More difficult, Ralhfs uses a differing
versification for alternate book traditions.  We did proof of concepts
with adding Alt books to an LXX versification, allowing LXX Book
versifications to have enough chapter, book max to cover either
tradition, creating a single module, having 2 modules-- the second
having only the alternate traditions.  I don't recall where we left off
on that or what strategy our current Rahlfs Bible uses.  Our CATSS LXX
GenBook includes book traditions as 'A' and 'B',

http://crosswire.org/study/bookdisplay.jsp?mod=LXXM

But that just punts on the problem and uses GenBook because doesn't need
to solve the problem of relating 'A' and 'B' together somehow.

Just some thoughts,

Troy 


On 1/13/19 8:22 AM, David Haslam wrote:
> The best solution may be to have two SMP modules each with 150 Psalms;
> one to have the V1s and the other to have the V2s for the Psalms with
> 2 versions. 
>
> NB. The canonical title should also be supplied for the Version 2.
>
> These Psalms could be given an extra technical note to explain further. 
>
> 138 Psalms would appear exactly the same in both modules, but the
> convenience more than compensates for the duplications. 
>
> Thoughts?
>
> David
>
> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 14:17, David Haslam  > wrote:
>> In response to DM, I think that's the wrong approach, as it would be
>> confusing to mix two different metres for how the same Psalm was
>> metrified in English.
>> What's required is *whole chapters* as 2 different variants.
>>
>> There are 25 lines containing the word '*version*':
>> s2 First Version
>> s2 Second Version
>> s2 First Version (S.M.)
>> s2 Second Version
>> s2 First Version
>> s2 Second Version
>> s2 First Version
>> s2 Second Version
>> s2 First Version
>> s2 Second Version
>> s2 First Version
>> s2 Second Version
>> s2 First Version - this version was retained from the 1562 English
>> and 1564 Scottish Psalters. It is by William Kethe.
>> s2 Second Version
>> cl Psalm 102 There is also a Long Metre version below *
>> s2 First Version
>> s2 Second Version
>> s2 First Version (8.7.8.7. Iambic)
>> s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.8.8.) This is a slightly modified version
>> of the Psalm as it first appeared in the Scottish Psalter of 1564 *
>> s2 First Version (C.M.)
>> s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.D.)
>> s2 First Version
>> s2 Second Version
>> s2 First version
>> s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.8.8.)
>>
>> As you can see, one of these instances is simply within a note.
>> So there are in fact 12 Psalms that have a second metrical version.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> David
>>
>> Sent with ProtonMail  Secure Email.
>>
>> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>> On Saturday, 12 January 2019 13:55, ref...@gmx.net 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ah, yes, sorry
>>>
>>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>>> autocorrects.
>>>
>>>
>>>  Original Message 
>>> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter
>>> From: David Haslam
>>> To: DM Smith
>>> CC: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>>>
>>>
>>> NB. Peter's initial message contained a *broken* link to
>>> https://github.com/refdoc/The-Scottish-Metric-Psalter-1650
>>>
>>> The repo is now at
>>> https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/scottish-psalter-1650
>>>
>>> i.e. In our public facing location for PD text development.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> Sent with ProtonMail  Secure Email.
>>>
>>> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>>> On Saturday, 12 January 2019 13:25, DM Smith
>>>  wrote:
>>>
 If you make one module do it as variations verse by verse.
  JSword works on this basis. Each needs to be well-formed XML.
 Otherwise it will toss the markup.

 Do the canonical headings vary too? That might pose a single
 module problem.

 David and I have discussed supporting multiple KJV modules from
 a single xml doc using a filter (e.g. XSLT) to produce subsets.
 Examples, with Apocrypha, without such, long s variant, .

 I already have a

Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter

2019-01-13 Thread David Haslam

The best solution may be to have two SMP modules each with 150 Psalms; one to 
have the V1s and the other to have the V2s for the Psalms with 2 versions.

NB. The canonical title should also be supplied for the Version 2.

These Psalms could be given an extra technical note to explain further.

138 Psalms would appear exactly the same in both modules, but the convenience 
more than compensates for the duplications.

Thoughts?

David

Sent from ProtonMail Mobile

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 14:17, David Haslam  wrote:

> In response to DM, I think that's the wrong approach, as it would be 
> confusing to mix two different metres for how the same Psalm was metrified in 
> English.
> What's required is whole chapters as 2 different variants.
>
> There are 25 lines containing the word 'version':
> s2 First Version
>
> s2 Second Version
>
> s2 First Version (S.M.)
>
> s2 Second Version
>
> s2 First Version
>
> s2 Second Version
>
> s2 First Version
>
> s2 Second Version
>
> s2 First Version
>
> s2 Second Version
>
> s2 First Version
>
> s2 Second Version
>
> s2 First Version - this version was retained from the 1562 English and 1564 
> Scottish Psalters. It is by William Kethe.
>
> s2 Second Version
> cl Psalm 102 There is also a Long Metre version below *
>
> s2 First Version
>
> s2 Second Version
>
> s2 First Version (8.7.8.7. Iambic)
>
> s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.8.8.) This is a slightly modified version of the 
> Psalm as it first appeared in the Scottish Psalter of 1564 *
>
> s2 First Version (C.M.)
> s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.D.)
>
> s2 First Version
>
> s2 Second Version
>
> s2 First version
>
> s2 Second Version (6.6.6.6.8.8.)
>
> As you can see, one of these instances is simply within a note.
> So there are in fact 12 Psalms that have a second metrical version.
>
> Best regards,
>
> David
>
> Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Saturday, 12 January 2019 13:55, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:
>
>> Ah, yes, sorry
>>
>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird autocorrects.
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter
>> From: David Haslam
>> To: DM Smith
>> CC: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>>
>>> NB. Peter's initial message contained a broken link to
>>> https://github.com/refdoc/The-Scottish-Metric-Psalter-1650
>>>
>>> The repo is now at
>>> https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/scottish-psalter-1650
>>>
>>> i.e. In our public facing location for PD text development.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
>>>
>>> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>>> On Saturday, 12 January 2019 13:25, DM Smith  wrote:
>>>
 If you make one module do it as variations verse by verse.  JSword works 
 on this basis. Each needs to be well-formed XML. Otherwise it will toss 
 the markup.

 Do the canonical headings vary too? That might pose a single module 
 problem.

 David and I have discussed supporting multiple KJV modules from a single 
 xml doc using a filter (e.g. XSLT) to produce subsets. Examples, with 
 Apocrypha, without such, long s variant, .

 I already have a couple of XSLT filters that others requested: no notes or 
 Strong’s numbers; Plaintext.

 In Him,
DM Smith

 On Jan 12, 2019, at 7:38 AM, David Haslam  wrote:

> Sparsely populated
>
> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 12:37, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:
>
>> Never looked at it. Why?
>>
>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird 
>> autocorrects.
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter
>> From: David Haslam
>> To: sword-devel@crosswire.org
>> CC:
>>
>>> You mean the Samaritan Pentateuch Dead Sea Scrolls variant module SPDSS 
>>> isn't rather more of an overkill ?
>>> Have you ever looked at the contents?
>>>
>>> I was about to suggest the same as Tom Sullivan did.
>>>
>>> A second module with just the alternative versions of these 11 or 12 
>>> Psalms,
>>>
>>> But is there a third metrical version of any Psalm?
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 10:30, Peter von Kaehne  wrote:
>>>
 On Sat, 2019-01-12 at 05:15 -0500, Tom Sullivan wrote:
> Peter:
>
> Suggestion: Make 2 modules, one for each translation. Most front
> ends
> will do parallel display.

 For 11 or 12 (I need to count them) psalms that seems overkill.

 Peter

 ___
 sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org

Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter

Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter

Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter

Re: [sword-devel] Second versions, Scottish Metric Psalter

4 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information