At 18:27 16-08-04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>How about an XML version of GBF? I think it's not being XML is the most
>annoying missing feature of GBF at the moment.
I thought about that, and the idea has some merit. I even started to define it, and
called it GBX. However, I probably won't use t
HTML format has been working very well for me, as it can be searched
easily in Konquerer and Mozilla browsers. RTF has been somewhat useful
because it is easily convertible into just about anything else.
On Sun, 2004-08-15 at 19:36, Kahunapule Michael P. Johnson wrote:
> Latest revision of WEB &
How about an XML version of GBF? I think it's not being XML is the most
annoying missing feature of GBF at the moment.
USFM is probably pretty good for our purposes since we have good USFM to
OSIS converters. I don't think there's any way to mark Words of Christ in
USFM, though (not according
In a message dated 8/15/2004 8:39:09 PM Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Also, I would like to know what you would think if I stopped
posting some formats on the above web sites, but instead provided a converter
program that could produce the "missing" formats. Would that
Latest revision of WEB & WEBME: 9 August 2004
WEB web sites: http://eBible.org/web/, http://WEBible.org/,
http://WorldEnglishBible.org
WEBME web sites: http://eBible.org/hnv/, http://hnvbible.org/, http://eBible.org/webme/
So far, the "master" copy of the World English Bible has been in "General
