:25 PM, ref...@gmx.net wrote:
>> We publish the OSIS text of the KJV . It pretty much reflects best standards
>> and has a huge number of features encoded, so can serve probably well as a
>> working example
>> Peter
>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typ
weird autocorrects.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Back conversion
From: Tom Sullivan
To: sword-devel@crosswire.org
CC:
Thank you for the replies. I got an output using -r OSIS, but it does
not look good or useful.
My goal was to look at the OSIS used, for ex
t; Best regards,> > David> > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.> >> -------- Original Message >> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Back conversion>> Local Time: 30 December 2017 7:48 PM>> UTC Time: 30 December 2017 19:48>> From: dmsm...@crosswire.org&g
e:
>>To pick up on one possible misunderstanding by Tom,
>>Analysis tools such as *mod2imp* and *diatheke* take the *module
>>name* as the main command line argument.
>>Not the filename of the .bzz files in the .
>>i.e. Your command s
xt of the _sword
path_ as the current directory.
Best regards,
David
Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email.
---- Original Message ----
Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Back conversion
Local Time: 30 Decem
ontext of the _sword path_ as
>> the current directory.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> David
>>
>> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email.
>>
>> Original Message
>>> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Back conversion
&
ecure Email.
Original Message ----
Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Back conversion
Local Time: 30 December 2017 7:48 PM
UTC Time: 30 December 2017 19:48
From: dmsm...@crosswire.org
To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
Not really. The osis2mod process is lossy (no verse markers) and
.
Best regards,
David
Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
> Original Message
> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Back conversion
> Local Time: 30 December 2017 7:48 PM
> UTC Time: 30 December 2017 19:48
> From: dmsm...@crosswire.org
> To
Dear Tom,
Round trip back conversion is seriously disparaged.
For modules having few OSIS features, being mostly plain text content, mod2imp
followed by imp2vs may get you a module that should be the same as you started
with.
There's no guarantee.
However, the moment you have a module with any
Not really. The osis2mod process is lossy (no verse markers) and transformative
(it is in milestoned form). For that reason, we really don’t recommend it.
Also, many OSIS modules are built from non-OSIS source.
mod2imp expects the module to be installed. Beyond that I’m not sure.
mod2osis shoul
10 matches
Mail list logo
