OK. On my end with module generation,
I'll not worry about abbreviation uniqueness if there are strong
traditional abbreviations to use, but try to be unique most of the
time in module generation. Any conflicts that slip through
(especially across repositories) wi
> On Sep 2, 2015, at 11:14 AM, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
>
> On 09/02/2015 10:51 AM, David Haslam wrote:
>> those whose real module names include a lowercase
>> language code prefix are listed below all the modules that have a
>> capitalized [ModName].
> An unintentional side effect that I intend t
On 09/02/2015 10:51 AM, David Haslam wrote:
> those whose real module names include a lowercase
> language code prefix are listed below all the modules that have a
> capitalized [ModName].
An unintentional side effect that I intend to try to fix, caused by the
modules arriving in the list in ModNam
And in the sidebar, those whose real module names include a lowercase
language code prefix are listed below all the modules that have a
capitalized [ModName].
So (e.g.) Brenton comes after Worsley. (LOL)
David
--
View this message in context:
http://sword-dev.350566.n4.nabble.com/Semantic-
On 09/02/2015 10:24 AM, David Haslam wrote:
> The sidebar (etc) now just displays "Abbrev: Description"
You're right, my mistake.
The display of "Abbrev (Real)" is restricted to the module manager,
which is where I figured it mattered most, or at all. By the time the
user has installed a module,
Karl wrote,
"FYI, in Xiphos' module list trees -- sidebar, module manager, advanced
search, and parallel bible/commentary selector trees -- modules with
abbreviations show up as "Abbrev (Real)" so that it is clear to the user
what he's getting when he sees the selections."
That may have been the
Karl, can I summarise :
1) Abbreviations need to be bidirectional
2) Uniqueness needs to happen at user-level for bidirectionality to
work. Not above.
3) Both across repos and internal to repos we can have one, some and
many modules which carry the same abbreviation - KJV being the most
notorio
On 09/01/2015 09:45 PM, Kahunapule Michael Johnson wrote:
> The uniqueness of an abbreviation is not required as long as you never
> try to look up which module corresponds to that abbreviation. If all
> you do is use the abbreviation as a short way to display which text is
> selected, i.e. just lo
This assumes uni-directional use of an abbreviation. Once it is used for input,
that is bi-directional, given by a user by typing or otherwise, it has a
problem.
> On Sep 1, 2015, at 9:45 PM, Kahunapule Michael Johnson
> wrote:
>
> The uniqueness of an abbreviation is not required as long as
The uniqueness of an abbreviation is
not required as long as you never try to look up which module
corresponds to that abbreviation. If all you do is use the
abbreviation as a short way to display which text is selected,
i.e. just looking up the abbreviation given
On 09/01/2015 12:19 PM, Karl Kleinpaste
wrote:
I am in the middle of adding code to Xiphos
that [a] ignores Abbreviation when it collides with an existing
real module name, and [b] provides for the user to change
Abbreviation at any time, which valu
On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 18:19 -0400, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> On 09/01/2015 09:29 AM, DM Smith wrote:
> > Having Abbreviation=KJV for a Thai module is clearly not the
> > intent. To use it within a repo with uniqueness by language is
> > entirely a bad idea.
> I'm glad I didn't misunderstand this a
On 09/01/2015 09:29 AM, DM Smith wrote:
> Having Abbreviation=KJV for a Thai module is clearly not the intent. To use
> it within a repo with uniqueness by language is entirely a bad idea.
I'm glad I didn't misunderstand this aspect.
> Collisions are bad. There is always some nook or cranny in the
On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 16:47 -0400, David
>
> So as a new frontend developer I'm confused. What is the purpose of
> the Abbreviation conf entry and why world I want to use it over
> module name which should already be shortish (at least compared to
> title)?
If we could get it right then the A
> On Sep 1, 2015, at 4:47 PM, David Judah's Shadow Blue
> wrote:
>
>
> So as a new frontend developer I'm confused. What is the purpose of the
> Abbreviation conf entry and why world I want to use it over module name which
> should already be shortish (at least compared to title)?
The [name
On September 1, 2015 3:59:09 PM EDT, Kahunapule Michael Johnson
wrote:
>On 08/31/2015 10:26 PM, David Haslam wrote:
>
>Yesterday, I added a note in the wiki page:
>http://www.crosswire.org/wiki/DevTools:conf_Files#cite_note-1 1. We
>strongly advise to avoid using an Abbreviation that's identical
On 08/31/2015 10:26 PM, David Haslam
wrote:
Yesterday, I added a note in the wiki page:
http://www.crosswire.org/wiki/DevTools:conf_Files#cite_note-1
1. We strongly advise to avoid using an Abbreviation that's identical to the
ModName or Abbreviation of any other
I forget what JSword and BD do now but it is different than back then. I’m
pretty sure that Description doesn’t come into play anymore.
— DM
> On Sep 1, 2015, at 12:47 PM, David Haslam wrote:
>
> Hi DM,
>
> Yep - collisions are bad.
>
> I recall several years ago we had a conversation about
Hi DM,
Yep - collisions are bad.
I recall several years ago we had a conversation about having two versions
of the same module in Bible Desktop, and being informed that there was a
further requirement that the Description strings also had to be different. I
don't think we ever documented this in
> On Sep 1, 2015, at 9:01 AM, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 01:26 -0700, David Haslam wrote:
>> Yesterday, I added a note in the wiki page:
>>
>> http://www.crosswire.org/wiki/DevTools:conf_Files#cite_note-1
>>
>> 1. We strongly advise to avoid using an Abbreviation that's
On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 01:26 -0700, David Haslam wrote:
> Yesterday, I added a note in the wiki page:
>
> http://www.crosswire.org/wiki/DevTools:conf_Files#cite_note-1
>
> 1. We strongly advise to avoid using an Abbreviation that's identical
> to the
> ModName or Abbreviation of any other module.
Yesterday, I added a note in the wiki page:
http://www.crosswire.org/wiki/DevTools:conf_Files#cite_note-1
1. We strongly advise to avoid using an Abbreviation that's identical to the
ModName or Abbreviation of any other module. It only leads to confusion, and
may have unexpected consequences for
We know that xulsword also makes use of Abbreviations, primarily for
Localization (just as they were intended), so it would be useful to have
some response from John.
Now that we have an IBT repository, if I install one of the IBT modules
using Xiphos, because xulsword recognizes my sword path in
3) Use the same model as operating systems do for opening urls or file
types that have multiple registered handlers. Let the user select which to
use and possibly set a default.
On Aug 31, 2015 8:49 PM, "Peter von Kaehne" wrote:
> My take on this is following:
>
> To have a rule of no clash for a
My take on this is following:
To have a rule of no clash for abbreviations with ModuleName is unreasonable.
The whole point of Abbreviation is that i can name my modules how they are
named in common parlance. Irrespective of if there is somewhere else, in a
language i do not care about a module
The particular example at hand is KJV vs. engKJV2006. I know that
Michael is removing the latter from eBible repo, but this is a specific
instance of a general problem. So I will use it as my example.
Problem: KJV is a real module name. engKJV2006.conf contains
Abbreviation=KJV.
David Haslam n
26 matches
Mail list logo
