As it stands, Chris has offered to do independent and impartial
evaluation of the texts and make a determination. Works for me. So, I
don't plan to respond more to this thread until he reports his findings.
On May 31, 2006, at 10:08 AM, Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
wrote:
DM Smith escreveu:
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA wrote:
DM Smith escreveu:
On May 5, 2006, at 5:11 AM, DArio Matos wrote:
I have a problem with that. The Scriptures are far too
important to anyone to touch. For example, the people who have
been involved with PorAA up to now have shown too little respect
for text integrity.
Ok, ok. Anyone is welcomed to take any public domain Bible and
create an eText from it provided that they have the utmost respect
for text integrity and will verify their work as having that
integrity....
Yep.
And I think Crosswire has a responsibility to not accept texts
that lack a certain level of quality, excepting extraordinary
circumstances. (It might be arguable that a work of mediocre
quality that is unique is better than nothing. Which appears to be
the reasoning behind keeping PorAA available.)
That, and some reliance on some unspecified information by an
unnamed source I really can’t fathom. It seems to be deference
UnBounded if I am not mistaken, but I can’t understand such
deference for a misnamed and corrupted text no one knows for sure
where it came from, as several people attested already.
I think there are separate issues here.
One is a technical encoding issue that the module is incorrectly
encoded.
Another is a textual quality issue. (missing/wrong text, ...)
A third is that of ownership(copyright) and proper naming.
The first one we can solve.
It was solved already.
But it was not solved in isolation. It was the additional changes
that caused the effort to be turned away.
Yet without these ‘additional changes’ the text has several
important omissions.
Yes. Because it does not further cloud the copyright questions.
While PorAA might be in violation of copyright, as you contend it
is, we have not been contacted by a responsible party to contest it.
If that is the problem (only this week this has been stated), I
can ask them to. I just wonder if it is so hard to check it
ourselves. If you want me to scan a few pages of my Revisada and
send it here or publish somewhere I can do that.
Yes. Because fixing the textual issues such that it matches a
copyrighted work will infringe on copyright.
Can you infringe more something that is infringed already?
It already matches the work under copy rights even without the fixes.
The other way that it might be removed is that if the Portuguese
speaking people here would agree that it should not be available
based on quality issues.
What irks me is that no one else here seems to have even looked at
a copy of Versão Revisada, yet feels qualified to pontificate about
PorAA being something different.
Now that Chris has said he will try to do that, I’m assuaged.
The third requires negotiation with and permission from the
copyright owner.
That is the course I am currently into.
Keep pressing on!! And I am assuming it is not for the module that
is currently hosted, but the one you created.
They are the same, except for garbled and missing text, so I don’t
see how different that would be.
IBB hasn’t been responsive in the past, but their last answer
actually gave me some hope, and I published it here already I think
last year. I guess enough time passed for me to press them again.
One thing I thought is that they are doing a further revision of
Revisada, named ‘Almeida Século XXI’, under the coordination of
Luís Alberto Teixeira SAYÃO, the same scholar who did our NVI
(equivalent to your NIV). They already have the NT published. I
hope once they have it all, perhaps they will relent on the older,
but still useful, Revisada.
But in the end, I think a better effort will be to incorporate the
Tradução Brasileira.
--
Leandro G Faria Corcete DUTRA xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+55 (11) 5685 2219 Yahoo!: ymsgr:sendIM?lgcdutra
+55 (11) 9406 7191 ICQ/AIM: aim:GoIM?screenname=61287803
MSN: msnim:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<leandro.vcf>
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
