Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[David Haslam]

Thanks Troy,

Your link is to the Talk page for the KJV 2.6 project under DM's user profile.

Today, I've identified the email message that I sent to DM Smith on 2016-01-21 
which included an attachment Zip file containing the updated source text which 
he used to prepare KJV version 2.9 for its release. This was the release 
immediately preceding your (out-of-band) necessaryintervention that resulted in 
the present release version 2.10.2. The Talk page has not been updated in the 
light of that release, so references in section headings to 2.10 have become 
out-of-sync with actual version numbers. Part way down the Talk page is a line 
which reads:

Everything below here is yet to be done.

That's still true. Lots of detailed emails on the project were exchanged 
between myself and DM since then, but none of them has resulted in a further 
official release.

NB. Much of the work I did during the last 12 years is stored on my old Windows 
7 PC that began to show symptoms of hard drive problems last September. I'd 
already transferred my Thunderbird email profile to my new Windows 11 PC just 
after it was acquired at the end of December 2021. A large number of other 
files have not been transferred, though they were being backed up in the cloud 
via Carbonite.

I will try to elicit a response from DM via other channels. He mentioned much 
more than a year ago that he has not been keeping on top of CrossWire related 
emails - especially those from mailing lists - for quite a long while.

Best regards,

David

Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, January 16th, 2023 at 9:34 PM, Troy A. Griffitts 
 wrote:

> Hey guys. A few points of clarity.
>
> We do make the source available from our wiki page regarding the work.
>
> https://wiki.crosswire.org/User:Dmsmith/KJV_2.6
>
> You will find a link to the source somewhere on that page.
>
> DM Smith took over that work after we finished the KJV2003 work to manually 
> add the Strongs numbers to the NT. He still holds that pumpkin. It seems he 
> has been away for quite some time though, so maybe we can discuss if anyone 
> feels called to take over that work and we can ask DM how he feels about that.
>
> I would like to keep our official version, which is the source for almost 
> every KJV digital text out in the wild with Strongs numbers, under our 
> control for quality assurance, so at git.crosswire.org, but certainly we've 
> never had the intention to conceal the source. We want people to use it. 
> That's why we made it!
>
> Troy
>
> On January 16, 2023 1:24:17 PM PST, Robert Hunt  
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Michael for that (although I haven't heard of the Beaver Scriptures 
>> and my search engines gave no help).
>>
>> Even here in New Zealand where we're still (sort of) under the King, no one 
>> here would consider not using the KJV, and we most certainly wouldn't be 
>> anticipating a court case if we used it in an app.
>>
>> I'm sure there's many silent listeners/readers/list-lurkers here like me who 
>> would find 1/ some of the views on copyright expressed earlier on the list 
>> very one-sided and out of character for an org like CrossWire, and 2/ find 
>> the secrecy even more out of character, and 3/ finding the UK-centric 
>> character of some of the discussion quite out of character for an org with 
>> so many international resources (and even for me in a British CommonWealth 
>> country it seems strangely narrow).
>>
>> Can the source text at least be passed to someone outside of the UK to place 
>> onto GitHub? I'll volunteer (or I'm sure many others would also).
>>
>> Let's get the Bible out to more people, and with more accuracy and more 
>> linked resources.
>>
>> Blessings,
>> Robert Hunt
>> Freely-Given.org
>>
>> On 17/01/23 10:01, Michael Johnson wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/16/23 06:23, David Haslam wrote:
>>>
 And yes - it remains the case that the text of the KJV is protected by 
 Royal Letters Patent within the United Kingdom, and that in principle, 
 this copyright assertion should be upheld by subsequent mutual treaties in 
 those nations that were signatories of the Berne Convention.
>>>
>>> A minor correction with major implications: The KJV and Book of Common 
>>> Prayer Letters Patent are NOT a copyright with respect to the Berne 
>>> Convention. Those have no legal effect outside of the UK. Full stop. 
>>> BS/BFBS opinions notwithstanding. The latter organization, and especially 
>>> certain persons within them, have already proven that it is willing to 
>>> stretch copyright law to the extent of committing copyfraud, so I don't 
>>> trust their opinions. Case in point: the Beaver Scriptures. One could also 
>>> argue that King James said nothing about digital copies, but only printing, 
>>> which is not necessarily a lame point. All REAL copyrights expire. The term 
>>> may exceed a lifetime, but they do expire.
>>>
>>> In the unlikely event that I wanted to 

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[Troy A. Griffitts]

Hey guys. A few points of clarity.

We do make the source available from our wiki page regarding the work.

https://wiki.crosswire.org/User:Dmsmith/KJV_2.6

You will find a link to the source somewhere on that page.

DM Smith took over that work after we finished the KJV2003 work to manually add 
the Strongs numbers to the NT. He still holds that pumpkin. It seems he has 
been away for quite some time though, so maybe we can discuss if anyone feels 
called to take over that work and we can ask DM how he feels about that.

I would like to keep our official version, which is the source for almost every 
KJV digital text out in the wild with Strongs numbers, under our control for 
quality assurance, so at git.crosswire.org, but certainly we've never had the 
intention to conceal the source. We want people to use it. That's why we made 
it!

Troy 

On January 16, 2023 1:24:17 PM PST, Robert Hunt  wrote:
>Thanks Michael for that (although I haven't heard of the Beaver Scriptures and 
>my search engines gave no help).
>
>Even here in New Zealand where we're still (sort of) under the King, no one 
>here would consider not using the KJV, and we most certainly wouldn't be 
>anticipating a court case if we used it in an app.
>
>I'm sure there's many silent listeners/readers/list-lurkers here like me who 
>would find 1/ some of the views on copyright expressed earlier on the list 
>very one-sided and out of character for an org like CrossWire, and 2/ find the 
>secrecy even more out of character, and 3/ finding the UK-centric character of 
>some of the discussion quite out of character for an org with so many 
>international resources (and even for me in a British CommonWealth country it 
>seems strangely narrow).
>
>Can the source text at least be passed to someone outside of the UK to place 
>onto GitHub? I'll volunteer (or I'm sure many others would also).
>
>Let's get the Bible out to more people, and with more accuracy and more linked 
>resources.
>
>Blessings,
>Robert Hunt
>Freely-Given.org
>
>On 17/01/23 10:01, Michael Johnson wrote:
>> On 1/16/23 06:23, David Haslam wrote:
>>> 
>>> And yes - it remains the case that the text of the KJV is protected by 
>>> Royal Letters Patent within the United Kingdom, and that in principle, this 
>>> copyright assertion should be upheld by subsequent mutual treaties in those 
>>> nations that were signatories of the Berne Convention.
>> 
>> A minor correction with major implications: The KJV and Book of Common 
>> Prayer Letters Patent are NOT a copyright with respect to the Berne 
>> Convention. Those have no legal effect outside of the UK. Full stop. BS/BFBS 
>> opinions notwithstanding. The latter organization, and especially certain 
>> persons within them, have already proven that it is willing to stretch 
>> copyright law to the extent of committing copyfraud, so I don't trust their 
>> opinions. Case in point: the Beaver Scriptures. One could also argue that 
>> King James said nothing about digital copies, but only printing, which is 
>> not necessarily a lame point. All REAL copyrights expire. The term may 
>> exceed a lifetime, but they do expire.
>> 
>> In the unlikely event that I wanted to print KJV Bibles and import them into 
>> England or Wales, or if I wanted to print them within those countries, I 
>> would care about the very old Letters Patent about that. In no other case do 
>> they affect me or my Bible distribution decisions. There is no evidence of 
>> anyone trying to enforce those Letters Patent outside of England and Wales, 
>> except perhaps in other parts of the UK, let alone succeeding. I have, 
>> however, had a two Bible Societies challenge some texts I have online. In 
>> one case, I produced written permission to share the text. In the other, I 
>> produced evidence that the work was permanently and irrevocably in the 
>> Public Domain. I'm very careful about copyright law, and fully aware of its 
>> extreme complexity in an international context. I'm also not intimidated by 
>> copyfraud 
>> .
>> 
>> -- 
>> signature
>> 
>> Aloha,
>> */Michael Johnson/**
>> 26 HIWALANI LOOP • MAKAWAO HI 96768-8747*• USA
>> mljohnson.org  • eBible.org  • 
>> WorldEnglish.Bible  • PNG.Bible 
>> 
>> Signal/Telegram/WhatsApp/Telephone: +1 808-333-6921
>> Skype: kahunapule • Telegram/Twitter: @kahunapule • Facebook: 
>> fb.me/kahunapule 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> sword-devel mailing list:sword-devel@crosswire.org
>> http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
>> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[Robert Hunt]

Thanks Michael for that (although I haven't heard of the Beaver 
Scriptures and my search engines gave no help).


Even here in New Zealand where we're still (sort of) under the King, no 
one here would consider not using the KJV, and we most certainly 
wouldn't be anticipating a court case if we used it in an app.


I'm sure there's many silent listeners/readers/list-lurkers here like me 
who would find 1/ some of the views on copyright expressed earlier on 
the list very one-sided and out of character for an org like CrossWire, 
and 2/ find the secrecy even more out of character, and 3/ finding the 
UK-centric character of some of the discussion quite out of character 
for an org with so many international resources (and even for me in a 
British CommonWealth country it seems strangely narrow).


Can the source text at least be passed to someone outside of the UK to 
place onto GitHub? I'll volunteer (or I'm sure many others would also).


Let's get the Bible out to more people, and with more accuracy and more 
linked resources.


Blessings,
Robert Hunt
Freely-Given.org

On 17/01/23 10:01, Michael Johnson wrote:

On 1/16/23 06:23, David Haslam wrote:


And yes - it remains the case that the text of the KJV is protected 
by Royal Letters Patent within the United Kingdom, and that in 
principle, this copyright assertion should be upheld by 
subsequent mutual treaties in those nations that were signatories of 
the Berne Convention.


A minor correction with major implications: The KJV and Book of Common 
Prayer Letters Patent are NOT a copyright with respect to the Berne 
Convention. Those have no legal effect outside of the UK. Full stop. 
BS/BFBS opinions notwithstanding. The latter organization, and 
especially certain persons within them, have already proven that it is 
willing to stretch copyright law to the extent of committing 
copyfraud, so I don't trust their opinions. Case in point: the Beaver 
Scriptures. One could also argue that King James said nothing about 
digital copies, but only printing, which is not necessarily a lame 
point. All REAL copyrights expire. The term may exceed a lifetime, but 
they do expire.


In the unlikely event that I wanted to print KJV Bibles and import 
them into England or Wales, or if I wanted to print them within those 
countries, I would care about the very old Letters Patent about that. 
In no other case do they affect me or my Bible distribution decisions. 
There is no evidence of anyone trying to enforce those Letters Patent 
outside of England and Wales, except perhaps in other parts of the UK, 
let alone succeeding. I have, however, had a two Bible Societies 
challenge some texts I have online. In one case, I produced written 
permission to share the text. In the other, I produced evidence that 
the work was permanently and irrevocably in the Public Domain. I'm 
very careful about copyright law, and fully aware of its extreme 
complexity in an international context. I'm also not intimidated by 
copyfraud 
.


--
signature

Aloha,
*/Michael Johnson/**
26 HIWALANI LOOP • MAKAWAO HI 96768-8747*• USA
mljohnson.org  • eBible.org 
 • WorldEnglish.Bible  
• PNG.Bible 

Signal/Telegram/WhatsApp/Telephone: +1 808-333-6921
Skype: kahunapule • Telegram/Twitter: @kahunapule • Facebook: 
fb.me/kahunapule 



___
sword-devel mailing list:sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[Michael Johnson]

On 1/16/23 06:23, David Haslam wrote:


And yes - it remains the case that the text of the KJV is protected by Royal 
Letters Patent within the United Kingdom, and that in principle, this copyright 
assertion should be upheld by subsequent mutual treaties in those nations that 
were signatories of the Berne Convention.


A minor correction with major implications: The KJV and Book of Common Prayer Letters Patent are NOT a copyright with respect to the Berne Convention. Those have no legal effect outside of the UK. Full stop. BS/BFBS opinions notwithstanding. The latter organization, and especially certain persons within them, have already proven that it is willing to stretch copyright law to the extent of committing copyfraud, so I don't trust their opinions. Case in point: the Beaver Scriptures. One could also argue that 
King James said nothing about digital copies, but only printing, which is not necessarily a lame point. All REAL copyrights expire. The term may exceed a lifetime, but they do expire.


In the unlikely event that I wanted to print KJV Bibles and import them into England or Wales, or if I wanted to print them within those countries, I would care about the very old Letters Patent about that. In no other case do they affect me or my Bible distribution decisions. There is no evidence of anyone trying to enforce those Letters Patent outside of England and Wales, except perhaps in other parts of the UK, let alone succeeding. I have, however, had a two Bible Societies challenge some texts I have 
online. In one case, I produced written permission to share the text. In the other, I produced evidence that the work was permanently and irrevocably in the Public Domain. I'm very careful about copyright law, and fully aware of its extreme complexity in an international context. I'm also not intimidated by copyfraud .


--
signature

Aloha,
*/Michael Johnson/**
26 HIWALANI LOOP • MAKAWAO HI 96768-8747*• USA
mljohnson.org  • eBible.org  • 
WorldEnglish.Bible  • PNG.Bible 
Signal/Telegram/WhatsApp/Telephone: +1 808-333-6921
Skype: kahunapule • Telegram/Twitter: @kahunapule • Facebook: fb.me/kahunapule 

___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[Fr Cyrille]

Le 16/01/2023 à 17:23, David Haslam a écrit :
Seriously, what practical use are you proposing to make of the 
transcribed WikiSource text?
It’s far from being fully proofread and validated, as only a cursory 
inspection readily indicates.



I am not saying that. I just wanted to point out that we have access to 
the text. This does not answer the questions we are interested in. How 
to contribute to solve the bugs in the KJV.
For me I'm not going to continue discussing this. Neither you nor DM 
Smith seem willing to involve others on this issue. So until we have a 
solution like this, here is the link to the KJV where you can propose 
your improvements, I won't discuss it anymore unnecessarily.
Personally, I'm not interested in the KJV. I have more important 
projects for my own language.




And yes - it remains the case that the text of the KJV is protected by 
Royal Letters Patent within the United Kingdom, and that in principle, 
this copyright assertion should be upheld by subsequent mutual 
treaties in those nations that were signatories of the Berne Convention.


I’ve even discussed this matter with a friend who has worked for many 
years in the Bible Society (formerly known as the British and Foreign 
Bible Society).


That digital versions of the KJV exist on numerous websites and 
through a large variety of Bible software applications doesn’t negate 
that.


David

Sent from Proton Mail for iOS


On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 15:49, Fr Cyrille  
wrote:

Dear David,

I must admit that I am a little surprised by this speech. What is 
really protected by a copyright? The text of the KJV bible or the 
work done on this text? In our other conversation it didn't seem to 
me that it was Crosswire's contributions to the text that you were 
trying to protect? You mentioned the copyrights of the English crown...
Thank you for clarifying this point. I don't know what you are 
talking about when you say: "*It’s also a derived digital work - not 
the actual reference printed hard copy of the 1789 Oxford (Blayney) 
Edition*", and about the facsimile of DM Smith. Wikisource text it 
the blayney edition. In any case if you are trying to protect the 
crosswire additions to the text my surprise is even greater and I 
agree perfectly with what Michael says.


Br Cyrille

PS: I would like to say that once again we are wasting our time to 
know what to protect instead of looking for solutions to be able to 
contribute effectively to solve the bugs related to the module.


Le 16/01/2023 à 15:52, David Haslam a écrit :
Aside: The KJV at WikiSource would only be relevant if someone were 
wanting to create a text only KJV module. The CrossWire OSIS source 
text is a long way further down the road than plain text. There’s 
therefore no reason to keep mentioning it.


It’s also a derived digital work - not the actual reference printed 
hard copy of the 1789 Oxford (Blayney) Edition.


At best it might be used to help locate any residual textual 
differences that might yet be undiscovered in our KJV module, but 
that would involve doing a comparison with the plain text that could 
be easily exported from our module, and then checking any such diff 
locations in the printed facsimile copy that DM Smith possesses.


Nobody in their right mind is proposing to start with the one at 
WikiSource and insert all the feature rich OSIS XML markup that we 
already have in the existing source text.


Regards,

David

Sent from Proton Mail for iOS


On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 13:22, Fr Cyrille  
wrote:



Le 16/01/2023 à 14:01, David Haslam a écrit :
A copy of this reply is sent*bcc*: to DM Smith's personal icloud 
address.


Dear Fr Cyrille,

gitlab.com  is simply the _wrong place_ to 
host our *KJV* source text!


If necessary, it should be hosted *in-house* under 
git.crosswire.org  such that only 
CrossWire volunteers have access.


*Important*: The KJV module is an _exception_ to our usual 
practice of taking source text from a publicly accessible website 
or third party supplier. It was always specially developed 
*in-house* from the early days of CrossWire. Much of its 
development history is documented in the developer wiki at 
https://wiki.crosswire.org/CrossWire_KJV and related pages.


CrossWire volunteer *DM Smith* has long been the prime mover in 
this process.
AFAIK, he still carries the main responsibility for future *KJV* 
module releases.


NB. The related *KJVA*module should be maintained in parallel with 
any changes envisaged for the *KJV*module. ie. Special provision 
was made in 2014 to use two iterations of *osis2mod*such that the 
/Deuterocanonical/books were appended to the /Protocanonical/books 
using the *-a*option in the second command line. This implies that 
the process needs to be an exception to a semiautomatic module 
build script that DomCox now uses for OSIS modules. I helped DM in 
the run up to when version *2.10* was released. At that time, we 
had not been 

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[David Haslam]

Seriously, what practical use are you proposing to make of the transcribed 
WikiSource text?
It’s far from being fully proofread and validated, as only a cursory inspection 
readily indicates.

And yes - it remains the case that the text of the KJV is protected by Royal 
Letters Patent within the United Kingdom, and that in principle, this copyright 
assertion should be upheld by subsequent mutual treaties in those nations that 
were signatories of the Berne Convention.

I’ve even discussed this matter with a friend who has worked for many years in 
the Bible Society (formerly known as the British and Foreign Bible Society).

That digital versions of the KJV exist on numerous websites and through a large 
variety of Bible software applications doesn’t negate that.

David

Sent from Proton Mail for iOS

On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 15:49, Fr Cyrille  wrote:

> Dear David,
>
> I must admit that I am a little surprised by this speech. What is really 
> protected by a copyright? The text of the KJV bible or the work done on this 
> text? In our other conversation it didn't seem to me that it was Crosswire's 
> contributions to the text that you were trying to protect? You mentioned the 
> copyrights of the English crown...
> Thank you for clarifying this point. I don't know what you are talking about 
> when you say: "It’s also a derived digital work - not the actual reference 
> printed hard copy of the 1789 Oxford (Blayney) Edition", and about the 
> facsimile of DM Smith. Wikisource text it the blayney edition. In any case if 
> you are trying to protect the crosswire additions to the text my surprise is 
> even greater and I agree perfectly with what Michael says.
>
> Br Cyrille
>
> PS: I would like to say that once again we are wasting our time to know what 
> to protect instead of looking for solutions to be able to contribute 
> effectively to solve the bugs related to the module.
>
> Le 16/01/2023 à 15:52, David Haslam a écrit :
>
>> Aside: The KJV at WikiSource would only be relevant if someone were wanting 
>> to create a text only KJV module. The CrossWire OSIS source text is a long 
>> way further down the road than plain text. There’s therefore no reason to 
>> keep mentioning it.
>>
>> It’s also a derived digital work - not the actual reference printed hard 
>> copy of the 1789 Oxford (Blayney) Edition.
>
>> At best it might be used to help locate any residual textual differences 
>> that might yet be undiscovered in our KJV module, but that would involve 
>> doing a comparison with the plain text that could be easily exported from 
>> our module, and then checking any such diff locations in the printed 
>> facsimile copy that DM Smith possesses.
>>
>> Nobody in their right mind is proposing to start with the one at WikiSource 
>> and insert all the feature rich OSIS XML markup that we already have in the 
>> existing source text.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> David
>>
>> Sent from Proton Mail for iOS
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 13:22, Fr Cyrille  wrote:
>>
>>> Le 16/01/2023 à 14:01, David Haslam a écrit :
>>>
 A copy of this reply is sentbcc: to DM Smith's personal icloud address.

 Dear Fr Cyrille,

 gitlab.com is simply the wrong place to host our KJV source text!

 If necessary, it should be hosted in-house under git.crosswire.org such 
 that only CrossWire volunteers have access.

 Important: The KJV module is an exception to our usual practice of taking 
 source text from a publicly accessible website or third party supplier. It 
 was always specially developed in-house from the early days of CrossWire. 
 Much of its development history is documented in the developer wiki at 
 https://wiki.crosswire.org/CrossWire_KJV and related pages.

 CrossWire volunteer DM Smith has long been the prime mover in this process.
 AFAIK, he still carries the main responsibility for future KJV module 
 releases.

 NB. The related KJVA module should be maintained in parallel with any 
 changes envisaged for the KJV module. ie. Special provision was made in 
 2014 to use two iterations of osis2mod such that the Deuterocanonicalbooks 
 were appended to the Protocanonical books using the -a option in the 
 second command line. This implies that the process needs to be an 
 exception to a semiautomatic module build script that DomCox now uses for 
 OSIS modules. I helped DM in the run up to when version 2.10 was released. 
 At that time, we had not been making use of any git type environment to 
 keep track of changes for either the KJV or KJVA module.

 Aside: The emergency release of KJV version 2.10.2 was an exception to the 
 previous process. This was an ad hoc action that Troy deemed necessary 
 because of the nature of the issue being fixed.

 I could add further observations, but this will need to suffice for now.

 Best regards,

 David
>>>
>>> Thank you David do put 

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[Michael H]

So, the answer to "why keep the source closed?" is "There's no reason to
talk about it, because it's not actually source?"

This is exactly what I don't understand.

Consider other "midstream content hosting": At the Digital Bible Library:
USX XML source is a long way down the pipe from USFM, but several thousand
scripture works are stored and available with pretty liberal licenses.
Several hundred are available for inspection.

Why would inspection many types of USX be useful?  Why would people want to
see the source USFX and not USFM, (Or the scanse of books that they were
derived from?)

Because software developed for a specific XML is much more robust and less
buggy if a wide range of XML content is used for testing.  And when the XML
is available for inspection, apples to apples comparison between modules is
possible, creating the possibility to understand the code beyond the
specification, and avoid those gray areas where implementation isn't clear.

And when the XML is available publicly, inspection of the code itself
against it's upstream tagged text edition or scanned book edition can serve
to find where issues entered and eliminate them.

So, again, I don't understand why 'hidden' OSIS code is in anyone's best
interest. It would help all the participants on this thread who've
expressed frustration about getting bugs removed if there are good reasons
to hide the OSIS. I think understanding what this assertion means "*such
that only CrossWire volunteers have access."* is a worthy discussion on
this thread, which is about improving the Crosswire KJV module. I don't
understand why inserting demands and claims that open source is the wrong
way to source the KJV. What was the reason for making that assertion? And
simply suggesting we don't discuss it, when the dicussion is 'why can't we
get the KJV done?' and I've suggested that the cause is exactly what you
claim is a given. suggesting "there's no reason to talk about it" doesn't
seem to be finding solutions, but rather to make the process take longer
and keep solutions from being found.
___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[Fr Cyrille]

Dear David,

I must admit that I am a little surprised by this speech. What is really 
protected by a copyright? The text of the KJV bible or the work done on 
this text? In our other conversation it didn't seem to me that it was 
Crosswire's contributions to the text that you were trying to protect? 
You mentioned the copyrights of the English crown...
Thank you for clarifying this point. I don't know what you are talking 
about when you say: "*It’s also a derived digital work - not the actual 
reference printed hard copy of the 1789 Oxford (Blayney) Edition*", and 
about the facsimile of DM Smith. Wikisource text it the blayney edition. 
In any case if you are trying to protect the crosswire additions to the 
text my surprise is even greater and I agree perfectly with what Michael 
says.


Br Cyrille

PS: I would like to say that once again we are wasting our time to know 
what to protect instead of looking for solutions to be able to 
contribute effectively to solve the bugs related to the module.


Le 16/01/2023 à 15:52, David Haslam a écrit :
Aside: The KJV at WikiSource would only be relevant if someone were 
wanting to create a text only KJV module. The CrossWire OSIS source 
text is a long way further down the road than plain text. There’s 
therefore no reason to keep mentioning it.


It’s also a derived digital work - not the actual reference printed 
hard copy of the 1789 Oxford (Blayney) Edition.


At best it might be used to help locate any residual textual 
differences that might yet be undiscovered in our KJV module, but that 
would involve doing a comparison with the plain text that could be 
easily exported from our module, and then checking any 
such diff locations in the printed facsimile copy that DM Smith possesses.


Nobody in their right mind is proposing to start with the one at 
WikiSource and insert all the feature rich OSIS XML markup that we 
already have in the existing source text.


Regards,

David

Sent from Proton Mail for iOS


On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 13:22, Fr Cyrille  
wrote:



Le 16/01/2023 à 14:01, David Haslam a écrit :
A copy of this reply is sent*bcc*: to DM Smith's personal icloud 
address.


Dear Fr Cyrille,

gitlab.com  is simply the _wrong place_ to host 
our *KJV* source text!


If necessary, it should be hosted *in-house* under git.crosswire.org 
 such that only CrossWire volunteers have 
access.


*Important*: The KJV module is an _exception_ to our usual practice 
of taking source text from a publicly accessible website or third 
party supplier. It was always specially developed *in-house* from 
the early days of CrossWire. Much of its development history is 
documented in the developer wiki at 
https://wiki.crosswire.org/CrossWire_KJV and related pages.


CrossWire volunteer *DM Smith* has long been the prime mover in this 
process.
AFAIK, he still carries the main responsibility for future *KJV* 
module releases.


NB. The related *KJVA*module should be maintained in parallel with 
any changes envisaged for the *KJV*module. ie. Special provision was 
made in 2014 to use two iterations of *osis2mod*such that the 
/Deuterocanonical/books were appended to the /Protocanonical/books 
using the *-a*option in the second command line. This implies that 
the process needs to be an exception to a semiautomatic module build 
script that DomCox now uses for OSIS modules. I helped DM in the run 
up to when version *2.10* was released. At that time, we had not 
been making use of any git type environment to keep track of changes 
for either the KJV or KJVA module.


_Aside_: The emergency release of *KJV* version *2.10.2* was an 
exception to the previous process. This was an /ad hoc/ action that 
Troy deemed necessary because of the nature of the issue being fixed.


I could add further observations, but this will need to suffice for now.


Best regards,

David


Thank you David do put this information on the list so that everyone 
can understand the problem. Personally I don't agree with this 
restrictive view of KJV treatment but I had submitted to your 
decision. Because I don't bring the same importance to this very 
particular copyright claimed by the British Crown. The presence of 
KJV on wikisource is a proof of this.
However, what I see is that we are still at square one, i.e. nobody 
can do anything to improve the module. That's why I gave up, it's 
this report of a new error that revives the discussion.
For me if we don't give the tools to the Crosswire community to 
improve the module it's just doomed to stay as it is with its errors.
We could put the text on the right git, it would still be necessary 
that you allow other users to work on your text, and that the 
modification made in the emergency by Troy is validated in the 
current version before making other corrections. The corrections are 
extremely simple almost anyone can do it. The facsimile is on wikisource.

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[David Haslam]

Aside: The KJV at WikiSource would only be relevant if someone were wanting to 
create a text only KJV module. The CrossWire OSIS source text is a long way 
further down the road than plain text. There’s therefore no reason to keep 
mentioning it.

It’s also a derived digital work - not the actual reference printed hard copy 
of the 1789 Oxford (Blayney) Edition.

At best it might be used to help locate any residual textual differences that 
might yet be undiscovered in our KJV module, but that would involve doing a 
comparison with the plain text that could be easily exported from our module, 
and then checking any such diff locations in the printed facsimile copy that DM 
Smith possesses.

Nobody in their right mind is proposing to start with the one at WikiSource and 
insert all the feature rich OSIS XML markup that we already have in the 
existing source text.

Regards,

David

Sent from Proton Mail for iOS

On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 13:22, Fr Cyrille  wrote:

> Le 16/01/2023 à 14:01, David Haslam a écrit :
>
>> A copy of this reply is sentbcc: to DM Smith's personal icloud address.
>>
>> Dear Fr Cyrille,
>>
>> gitlab.com is simply the wrong place to host our KJV source text!
>>
>> If necessary, it should be hosted in-house under git.crosswire.org such that 
>> only CrossWire volunteers have access.
>>
>> Important: The KJV module is an exception to our usual practice of taking 
>> source text from a publicly accessible website or third party supplier. It 
>> was always specially developed in-house from the early days of CrossWire. 
>> Much of its development history is documented in the developer wiki at 
>> https://wiki.crosswire.org/CrossWire_KJV and related pages.
>>
>> CrossWire volunteer DM Smith has long been the prime mover in this process.
>> AFAIK, he still carries the main responsibility for future KJV module 
>> releases.
>>
>> NB. The related KJVA module should be maintained in parallel with any 
>> changes envisaged for the KJV module. ie. Special provision was made in 2014 
>> to use two iterations of osis2mod such that the Deuterocanonicalbooks were 
>> appended to the Protocanonical books using the -a option in the second 
>> command line. This implies that the process needs to be an exception to a 
>> semiautomatic module build script that DomCox now uses for OSIS modules. I 
>> helped DM in the run up to when version 2.10 was released. At that time, we 
>> had not been making use of any git type environment to keep track of changes 
>> for either the KJV or KJVA module.
>>
>> Aside: The emergency release of KJV version 2.10.2 was an exception to the 
>> previous process. This was an ad hoc action that Troy deemed necessary 
>> because of the nature of the issue being fixed.
>>
>> I could add further observations, but this will need to suffice for now.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> David
>
> Thank you David do put this information on the list so that everyone can 
> understand the problem. Personally I don't agree with this restrictive view 
> of KJV treatment but I had submitted to your decision. Because I don't bring 
> the same importance to this very particular copyright claimed by the British 
> Crown. The presence of KJV on wikisource is a proof of this.
> However, what I see is that we are still at square one, i.e. nobody can do 
> anything to improve the module. That's why I gave up, it's this report of a 
> new error that revives the discussion.
> For me if we don't give the tools to the Crosswire community to improve the 
> module it's just doomed to stay as it is with its errors.
> We could put the text on the right git, it would still be necessary that you 
> allow other users to work on your text, and that the modification made in the 
> emergency by Troy is validated in the current version before making other 
> corrections. The corrections are extremely simple almost anyone can do it. 
> The facsimile is on wikisource.
> https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:KJV_1769_Oxford_Edition,_vol._1.djvu
>
> Best regards,
>
> Br Cyrille
>
>> Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.
>>
>> --- Original Message ---
>> On Monday, January 16th, 2023 at 11:51 AM, Fr Cyrille 
>> [](mailto:fr.cyri...@tiberiade.be) wrote:
>>
>>> Le 16/01/2023 à 11:27, Fr Cyrille a écrit :
>>>
 Le 12/01/2023 à 21:44, Matěj Cepl a écrit :

> On 2023-01-12, 18:57 GMT, Fr Cyrille wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, the work on KJV is currently at a standstill, and bugs
>> are piling up on the tracker. I wanted to offer my help but I didn't get
>> any answer. This is a problem that should be treated seriously,
>> considering the importance of the KJV.
>
> Well, it would probably help if
> https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/kjv/
> actually
> contained sources.

 I tried to do this, but since some people say there are copyrights issues 
 on the KJV, although the full text is on wikisource which has a very 
 strict copyrights 

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[Michael H]

>
>
> If necessary, it should be hosted in-house under git.crosswire.org *such
> that only CrossWire volunteers have access.*


I've never understood this "hide the source" mentality. It makes no sense,
and seems to compromise the integrity of what crosswire bible society
stands for. The founder and most participants have spent their time and
energy seeking to make scripture in all forms available in all ways without
cost. It simply doesn't fit the ethic to keep the source hidden. Protect it
from vandalism of course. but prevent access to scripture? I just don't get
the reason why.

And I'm pointing this out in this thread that is discussing the slow pace
of change on this 'hidden source' and the continuing existence of bugs in
this source for a reason. Possibly the direct cause of the slow pace of
change and continuing existence of bugs is exactly this reason. That is,
the reason WHY bugs remain is that the source isn't in the light to be
examined and corrected.
___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[Fr Cyrille]

Le 16/01/2023 à 14:01, David Haslam a écrit :

A copy of this reply is sent*bcc*: to DM Smith's personal icloud address.

Dear Fr Cyrille,

gitlab.com  is simply the _wrong place_ to host 
our *KJV* source text!


If necessary, it should be hosted *in-house* under git.crosswire.org 
 such that only CrossWire volunteers have 
access.


*Important*: The KJV module is an _exception_ to our usual practice of 
taking source text from a publicly accessible website or third party 
supplier. It was always specially developed *in-house* from the early 
days of CrossWire. Much of its development history is documented in 
the developer wiki at https://wiki.crosswire.org/CrossWire_KJV and 
related pages.


CrossWire volunteer *DM Smith* has long been the prime mover in this 
process.
AFAIK, he still carries the main responsibility for future *KJV* 
module releases.


NB. The related *KJVA*module should be maintained in parallel with any 
changes envisaged for the *KJV*module. ie. Special provision was made 
in 2014 to use two iterations of *osis2mod*such that the 
/Deuterocanonical/books were appended to the /Protocanonical/books 
using the *-a*option in the second command line. This implies that the 
process needs to be an exception to a semiautomatic module build 
script that DomCox now uses for OSIS modules. I helped DM in the run 
up to when version *2.10* was released. At that time, we had not been 
making use of any git type environment to keep track of changes for 
either the KJV or KJVA module.


_Aside_: The emergency release of *KJV* version *2.10.2* was an 
exception to the previous process. This was an /ad hoc/ action that 
Troy deemed necessary because of the nature of the issue being fixed.


I could add further observations, but this will need to suffice for now.


Best regards,

David


Thank you David do put this information on the list so that everyone can 
understand the problem. Personally I don't agree with this restrictive 
view of KJV treatment but I had submitted to your decision. Because I 
don't bring the same importance to this very particular copyright 
claimed by the British Crown. The presence of KJV on wikisource is a 
proof of this.
However, what I see is that we are still at square one, i.e. nobody can 
do anything to improve the module. That's why I gave up, it's this 
report of a new error that revives the discussion.
For me if we don't give the tools to the Crosswire community to improve 
the module it's just doomed to stay as it is with its errors.
We could put the text on the right git, it would still be necessary that 
you allow other users to work on your text, and that the modification 
made in the emergency by Troy is validated in the current version before 
making other corrections. The corrections are extremely simple almost 
anyone can do it. The facsimile is on wikisource.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:KJV_1769_Oxford_Edition,_vol._1.djvu

Best regards,

Br Cyrille



Sent with Proton Mail  secure email.

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, January 16th, 2023 at 11:51 AM, Fr Cyrille 
 wrote:





Le 16/01/2023 à 11:27, Fr Cyrille a écrit :



Le 12/01/2023 à 21:44, Matěj Cepl a écrit :

On 2023-01-12, 18:57 GMT, Fr Cyrille wrote:

Unfortunately, the work on KJV is currently at a standstill, and bugs
are piling up on the tracker. I wanted to offer my help but I didn't get
any answer. This is a problem that should be treated seriously,
considering the importance of the KJV.

Well, it would probably help if
https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/kjv/  actually
contained sources.
I tried to do this, but since some people say there are copyrights 
issues on the KJV, although the full text is on wikisource which has 
a very strict copyrights enforcement policy, I gave up the project.


My attempt: https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/kjv

Best,

Matěj



___
sword-devel mailing list:sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page




___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[David Haslam]

A copy of this reply is sentbcc: to DM Smith's personal icloud address.

Dear Fr Cyrille,

gitlab.com is simply the wrong place to host our KJV source text!

If necessary, it should be hosted in-house under git.crosswire.org such that 
only CrossWire volunteers have access.

Important: The KJV module is an exception to our usual practice of taking 
source text from a publicly accessible website or third party supplier. It was 
always specially developed in-house from the early days of CrossWire. Much of 
its development history is documented in the developer wiki at 
https://wiki.crosswire.org/CrossWire_KJV and related pages.

CrossWire volunteer DM Smith has long been the prime mover in this process.
AFAIK, he still carries the main responsibility for future KJV module releases.

NB. The related KJVA module should be maintained in parallel with any changes 
envisaged for the KJV module. ie. Special provision was made in 2014 to use two 
iterations of osis2mod such that the Deuterocanonicalbooks were appended to the 
Protocanonical books using the -a option in the second command line. This 
implies that the process needs to be an exception to a semiautomatic module 
build script that DomCox now uses for OSIS modules. I helped DM in the run up 
to when version 2.10 was released. At that time, we had not been making use of 
any git type environment to keep track of changes for either the KJV or KJVA 
module.

Aside: The emergency release of KJV version 2.10.2 was an exception to the 
previous process. This was an ad hoc action that Troy deemed necessary because 
of the nature of the issue being fixed.

I could add further observations, but this will need to suffice for now.

Best regards,

David

Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, January 16th, 2023 at 11:51 AM, Fr Cyrille  
wrote:

> Le 16/01/2023 à 11:27, Fr Cyrille a écrit :
>
>> Le 12/01/2023 à 21:44, Matěj Cepl a écrit :
>>
>>> On 2023-01-12, 18:57 GMT, Fr Cyrille wrote:
>>>
 Unfortunately, the work on KJV is currently at a standstill, and bugs
 are piling up on the tracker. I wanted to offer my help but I didn't get
 any answer. This is a problem that should be treated seriously,
 considering the importance of the KJV.
>>>
>>> Well, it would probably help if
>>> https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/kjv/
>>> actually
>>> contained sources.
>>
>> I tried to do this, but since some people say there are copyrights issues on 
>> the KJV, although the full text is on wikisource which has a very strict 
>> copyrights enforcement policy, I gave up the project.
>
> My attempt: https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/kjv
>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Matěj
>>
>> ___
>> sword-devel mailing list:
>> sword-devel@crosswire.org
>>
>> http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
>> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[Fr Cyrille]

Le 16/01/2023 à 11:27, Fr Cyrille a écrit :



Le 12/01/2023 à 21:44, Matěj Cepl a écrit :

On 2023-01-12, 18:57 GMT, Fr Cyrille wrote:

Unfortunately, the work on KJV is currently at a standstill, and bugs
are piling up on the tracker. I wanted to offer my help but I didn't get
any answer. This is a problem that should be treated seriously,
considering the importance of the KJV.

Well, it would probably help if
https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/kjv/  actually
contained sources.
I tried to do this, but since some people say there are copyrights 
issues on the KJV, although the full text is on wikisource which has a 
very strict copyrights enforcement policy, I gave up the project.


My attempt: https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/kjv

Best,

Matěj



___
sword-devel mailing list:sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

Re: [sword-devel] Correction for KJV module in 2 Corinthians 1:8

[Fr Cyrille]

Le 12/01/2023 à 21:44, Matěj Cepl a écrit :

On 2023-01-12, 18:57 GMT, Fr Cyrille wrote:

Unfortunately, the work on KJV is currently at a standstill, and bugs
are piling up on the tracker. I wanted to offer my help but I didn't get
any answer. This is a problem that should be treated seriously,
considering the importance of the KJV.

Well, it would probably help if
https://gitlab.com/crosswire-bible-society/kjv/  actually
contained sources.
I tried to do this, but since some people say there are copyrights 
issues on the KJV, although the full text is on wikisource which has a 
very strict copyrights enforcement policy, I gave up the project.

Best,

Matěj
___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page