Should we now discuss standardizing implementations? Are people in favor of doing that?
-DJ On Dec 10, 2007 10:02 AM, Karl Kleinpaste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Daniel Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Reading your post reminded me of a > > discussion earlier this year. I searched and found the thread I > > remembered. It talks about individually implemented Sword protocols. > ... > > GnomeSword - sword:// > > "GS understands "sword://ModuleName/KeyIntoThatModule" where the key > > is obviously a verse reference for Bibles and commentaries, but just > > as easily is a treekey for genbooks and lexdicts." > > GnomeSword does this for both sword:// and bible:// equivalently, > implemented by creating needed GConf keys in /desktop/gnome/url-handlers. > > There has never been a standard defined for what should be done with > sword:// and bible://, which created a vacuum to be filled by individual > implementers, so we've each done something appropriate for our > respective environments. > > > _______________________________________________ > sword-devel mailing list: [email protected] > http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel > Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page > _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: [email protected] http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
