Greg Hellings wrote:
This brings up another interesting question (in my opinion). Why are
there several standard modules which are distributed without
compression? Things like the the ASV, the Vulgate and the WEB are all distributed in uncompressed format. Might it be beneficial for us to
zip those up (especially the ASV and WEB, which I would imagine are
both popular modules?) and distribute them in a ztext format?  Are
there any advantages to having them in rawtext rather than ztext,
except for minor performance advantages?  Just curious!

I can think of several reasons for rawtext (non-compressed):

1. The installation files can be quite a bit smaller and thus take less time to download. This is an issue for people with slooooooow, unreliable, and possibly expensive Internet connectivity with POTS modems, such as those people in the 3rd world. The NSIS installer can compress rawtext with lzma, whereas the ztext will only compress a neglible amount, if at all. Lzma tends to have much slower decompression speed than zlib, but its compression ratio is almost always signficantly better (smaller compressed files).

For example, LcdBibleStarterKitSetup_WEB.exe (rawtext with some markup and embedded notes) is about 1.41mb (executable, documentation, and WEB OT+NT), whereas LcdBibleStarterKitSetup_AKJV.exe (ztext with minimal markup) is about 1.75mb.

2. Search speed can be significantly faster. Displaying a chapter typically doesn't take long at all, since only a small number of verses are being dealt with. RawText vs ZText is a "who cares". However, non-Lucene searching of the entire Bible text involves fetching 31,000+ verses (more for searches that span multiple texts.)

3. It is easier to debug/examine a module. You can use a text editor to directly look at something that seems amiss (or if you want to learn how something is done). With ztext, you have to run a utility like mod2vpl and look at the result.

If you asume that all end-users have a reasonably modern computer, then ztext is probably better, overall. LcdBible (Lowest Common Denominator) has a "niche" of working well on "dinosaur" computers (such as those donated to missionaries in the 3rd world), and rawtext is preferred, IMHO.


_______________________________________________
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