Am 27.02.2009 um 02:02 schrieb Peter von Kaehne:
2. Add a comparison table for desktop front-ends called "Which SWORD
application is right for me?" or something like that. I would be
happy
to contribute to this. It could include columns for OS's supported,
RtoL
support, localization, layout
I agree.
I am not a programmer but a user of the software.
CS Advantages
1.verse list feature
a. verse list will switch to what ever translation you have open. You
can print the same list in different languages with just a couple of
clicks.
I usually teach and preach from verse lists.
David,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 5:31 AM, David Troidl wrote:
> I'm coming late to this thread. But as a BibleCS user, though I haven't
> sampled all the alternatives, I am also using BPBible portable on my flash
> drive at school. I have to say there is no comparison. I stick by BibleCS.
I'm
Is there a version of BIBLE TIME for windows available?
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:02:32 +0200 Eeli Kaikkonen
writes:
> Quoting Jonathan Morgan :
>
> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Troy A. Griffitts
> > wrote:
> >> Congratulations guys!!! This is great news! Our Windows users
> now have
> >>
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Adrian Korten wrote:
> Good day,
>
> I'm advising a team of Thai people who would like to prepare a Bible and
> book for import to Sword. They currently have both texts in Word with
> in-line mark-up (no styles). I assume that they would need to save as raw
>
Original Message -
*From:* Peter von Kaehne
*To:* "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum"
*Sent:* 02/26/2009 3:45:07 PM +0700
*Subject:* [sword-devel] OSIS editor
Adrian Korten wrote:
Good day,
I'm advising a team of Thai people who would like to prepare a Bible
and book for impor
That sounds like a big
task. Assuming the Thai is unicode, somehow you have to get the
documents into an xml file encoded in utf8. For the Bible obviously
USFM is the preferred option as an intermediate step because you can
use USFM editors like Bibedit, SIL FieldWorks, etc., to edit USFM more
Good day,
By inline markup, I mean that it is bolded, centred, super-scripted,
etc. (Sorry, I'm not sure of the right terminology but may display
markup would have been a better term.) But no standard format markup. I
would either recommend that they markup with USFM or OSIS.
ak
- Orig
I must not have the right
to create new pages on the wiki, so I will need someone to create one
for me to start working on what I proposed. It could be called "What
SWORD Application is Right for Me?".
Daniel
Peter von Kaehne wrote:
Daniel Owens wrote:
This discussion about depre
Daniel Owens wrote:
> This discussion about deprecating BibleCS is no doubt fueled by the fact
> that it's name suggests it is THE flagship program for Windows. To be
> sure, for English (and other ascii-friendly languages) users, it is a
> feature rich alternative. However, given that it has limit
This discussion about deprecating BibleCS is no doubt fueled by the fact
that it's name suggests it is THE flagship program for Windows. To be
sure, for English (and other ascii-friendly languages) users, it is a
feature rich alternative. However, given that it has limitations with
regard to no
On Feb 26, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Jonathan Morgan wrote:
I applaud Xiphos and BibleTime for coming to Windows. Each provides a
different way at approaching God's Word. Now we have 5 major,
supported
frontends for Windows that people can choose from! (I'm including
AlKitab)
But not, it appears
Jonathan Morgan wrote:
>> I applaud Xiphos and BibleTime for coming to Windows. Each provides a
>> different way at approaching God's Word. Now we have 5 major, supported
>> frontends for Windows that people can choose from! (I'm including AlKitab)
>
> But not, it appears, including BPBible, whic
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 5:37 AM, Barry Drake wrote:
> Hi there ..
>
> Peter von Kaehne wrote:
>>
>> We should though make clear - once BT is released - that there are three
>> flagship applications on Windows and that BibleCS is not anymore unique.
>
> I still feel it ought to be flagged as no
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 4:27 AM, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> Jonathan Morgan wrote:
>> This is now the time to consider again removing the unsupported "Sword
>> for Windows", which is condemned by many and misleads many about the
>> potential of the Sword platform because it appears to be the offici
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 5:49 AM, DM Smith wrote:
> Jonathan Morgan wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Troy A. Griffitts
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Congratulations guys!!! This is great news! Our Windows users now have
>>> choices 4+ choices! We're really going to have to redo our CD auto
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, DM Smith wrote:
> Most of the criticisms that I hear about BibleCS relate to how it looks,
> not what it does. I think Manfred's comment about people not developing
> for the Mac is true for Windows too. What developer has jumped in to
> improve BibleCS?
>
The used GUI toolkit
Jonathan Morgan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Troy A. Griffitts
wrote:
Congratulations guys!!! This is great news! Our Windows users now have
choices 4+ choices! We're really going to have to redo our CD autorun
splash to present these choices to our users.
This is now t
Hello
there is a brandnew tool that could be helpful
Zefania XML to Osis XML
With this tool you are able to convert Zefania XML bible modules into
OSIS bible modules according to the best practice descripted at
crosswire bible society wiki. Zef2Osis creates OSIS files that should
go through the
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Manfred Bergmann wrote:
> That'd be great. Even though I did not really use BibleTime nor
> GnomeSword/Xiphos I'm looking forward to the new BibleTime version
> based on QT4(?).
Greg Hellings got it already working on Mac. See
http://devel.bibletime.info/wiki/BuildingBibleTime
Hi there ..
Peter von Kaehne wrote:
We should though make clear - once BT is released - that there are three
flagship applications on Windows and that BibleCS is not anymore unique.
I still feel it ought to be flagged as no longer current. I'm going
back to when I was woking on the NET m
Hello everyone,
I'm coming late to this thread. But as a BibleCS user, though I haven't
sampled all the alternatives, I am also using BPBible portable on my
flash drive at school. I have to say there is no comparison. I stick
by BibleCS.
Peace,
David
Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> . But it is clearly not deprecated right now.
>
> As long as it supports all currently released modules and as long as
> there are no modules held back by lack of BibleCS development I can not
> see how we can even think of removing it.
We should though make clear - onc
Jonathan Morgan wrote:
> This is now the time to consider again removing the unsupported "Sword
> for Windows", which is condemned by many and misleads many about the
> potential of the Sword platform because it appears to be the official
> (and thus the "best") one to casual onlookers.
I think th
Am 26.02.2009 um 17:01 schrieb Mark Trompell:
Am Thu, 26 Feb 2009 15:43:25 +
schrieb Manfred Bergmann :
I think even though many people have Macs nowadays, very few do
development on it. And then there is Objective-C and Interface
Builder which are languages tools only available to Mac. T
Am Thu, 26 Feb 2009 15:43:25 +
schrieb Manfred Bergmann :
> I think even though many people have Macs nowadays, very few do
> development on it. And then there is Objective-C and Interface
> Builder which are languages tools only available to Mac. That makes
> it more difficult for people c
Am 26.02.2009 um 14:59 schrieb Eeli Kaikkonen:
Quoting Karl Kleinpaste :
Eeli Kaikkonen writes:
But if you allow me to go back to BibleTime - ... At the moment
we have less manpower than Xiphos have had for some time
To me, that's an extraordinary and peculiar claim, considering the
dear
Quoting Karl Kleinpaste :
Eeli Kaikkonen writes:
But if you allow me to go back to BibleTime - ... At the moment
we have less manpower than Xiphos have had for some time
To me, that's an extraordinary and peculiar claim, considering the
dearth of contributors (at least in SVN commits, other
Hi there
Jonathan Morgan wrote:
Without doubt it should be deprecated and stated
clearly as being utterly unsupported and moved down the list at least
as far as LCDBible.
First: congratulatiions to the BT team. For my part, I have not used
BibleCS since the Windows Xiphos. Now I ha
Eeli Kaikkonen writes:
> But if you allow me to go back to BibleTime - ... At the moment
> we have less manpower than Xiphos have had for some time
To me, that's an extraordinary and peculiar claim, considering the
dearth of contributors (at least in SVN commits, other than in interface
translat
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Eeli Kaikkonen
wrote:
> Quoting Jonathan Morgan :
>
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Troy A. Griffitts
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Congratulations guys!!! This is great news! Our Windows users now have
>>> choices 4+ choices! We're really going to have to redo our C
Quoting Jonathan Morgan :
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Troy A. Griffitts
wrote:
Congratulations guys!!! This is great news! Our Windows users now have
choices 4+ choices! We're really going to have to redo our CD autorun
splash to present these choices to our users.
This is now the t
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Troy A. Griffitts
wrote:
> Congratulations guys!!! This is great news! Our Windows users now have
> choices 4+ choices! We're really going to have to redo our CD autorun
> splash to present these choices to our users.
This is now the time to consider again rem
Adrian,
What does the inline markup look like? I mean, is it like standard
format markup (USFM, MDF, etc.), or am I way off the mark?
Daniel
Peter von Kaehne wrote:
Adrian
Korten wrote:
Good day,
I'm advising a team of Thai people who would like to prepare a Bible
and book for
Adrian Korten wrote:
Good day,
I'm advising a team of Thai people who would like to prepare a Bible and
book for import to Sword. They currently have both texts in Word with
in-line mark-up (no styles). I assume that they would need to save as
raw text and then start adding the markup. Could
35 matches
Mail list logo
