Quoting Jonathan Morgan <jonmmor...@gmail.com>:
I'll add to this:
f) Should support passages, not just individual verses (the definition
of a passage is interesting - after looking at my notes that I take,
I'm inclined to extend it to any collection of verses, not just a
continuous passage, and will probably change it to that in BPBible
0.4.1).
Feel free to dispute, but it makes sense to me.
It's quite difficult to follow others' thoughts in this subject. One
important thing is to make difference between the techical
implementation and an end user/UI need. For example, how
List1
1: Matt 1:2-5, John 1:3
2: Luke 3:2-4, Rev 1:1
and
List2
1:Matt 1:2-5
2: John 1:3
3: Luke 3:2-4
4: Rev 1:1
and List1
List3
Sublist1
1: Matt 1:2-5
2: John 1:3
Sublist2
1: Luke 3:2-4
2: Rev 1:1
differ from each other in implementation and in a use case? I see
List1 and List3 semantically identical, though they look different in
UI. Even the List1 could be implemented with non-non-contiguous ( :) )
passages - items 1 and 2 are just sublists.
So, is it time to resume the debate and bring it to a conclusion?
I don't believe it is possible to conclude in practice (or even in
theory), since that would be assuming that there is one solution that
will suit all needs. I can 95% guarantee that some of the things I
want to do will not be interesting to others or just plain will not be
implemented. That being the case, I prefer to implement what I
believe to be the right thing or just an idea I have in mind without
being fettered by any compatibility or anything. If it turns out to
be a dead end then I have only wasted my time.
Whatever the implementation is, if we want the SWORD applications to
interact with each other and be compatible - which they really should
do - we have to create explicit conventions for
bookmarks/tags/whatever exchange. A common technical implementation
doesn't help at all if the frontends implement the ideas differently.
For example, the frontends must not use other than plain text. They
are not allowed to change the order of the bookmarks unless user wants
it.
It may be impossible to conclude in practice, either in technical or
in UI level. At minimum we need some technical implemantion for
bookmarks (I'm leaving "tags" out because I don't understand the
concept well enough) AND explicit usage convention for bookmarks. The
technical implementation can be used for whatever purpose, for example
for storing app settings, but a SWORD Bookmark Compliant application
must follow the written conventions to offer the users a user
interface which allows using the bookmarks in other compliant apps.
I take very strongly the "version independent
unless asked otherwise" viewpoint.
I agree. In that case we need to take care of v11n. People want a
specific passage, not whatever is in Book2:3 in some translation.
--Eeli Kaikkonen
_______________________________________________
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
