Wiki table already updated. Enjoy the rest of your trip, Nic.
David
--
View this message in context:
http://sword-dev.350566.n4.nabble.com/Apocrypha-Deutercanonical-Books-tp3006612p3008232.html
Sent from the SWORD Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
PocketSword supports av11n & can access the extra books not in the KJV... :)
On another note, today I was able to access crosswire.org from inside China!
I'm not sure if it gets blacklisted at all by the government, but I was excited
- take that, twitter & Facebook... ;)
I'll update the wiki con
Neil Rees' abstract for his BibleTech:2010 address reads,
Towards Canon-Neutral Bible Computer Applications
There are many different canonical traditions within Christianity and
Judaism. The same books of the Bible are ordered differently in different
traditions. Yet most of the software and web
I have just added a new row to the table in the wiki page.
http://crosswire.org/wiki/Choosing_a_SWORD_program#Module_Support
http://crosswire.org/wiki/Choosing_a_SWORD_program#Module_Support .
By all means expand on this, but not too verbosely.
A better place to make verbose distinctions would b
ere might be others but these are some of the challenges I see.
In Him,
DM
HTH
Peter
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 09:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Von: David Haslam
An: sword-devel@crosswire.org
Betreff: Re: [sword-devel] Apocrypha/Deutercanonical Books
Barry wrote,
Peter,
Therefore the table in the wiki page could be made more useful by adding a
new row for
Can display Deuterocanonical books?
IMHO, this would focus minds of developers and help potential users choose a
suitable front-end if they wish to include in their Bible study the books in
the Apocryp
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 17:48 +0200, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> Bibletime handles it I think.
I've just installed BibleTime and DRC and I can confirm that it handles
it very well. Congratulations to everyone for all the good work! I
look forward to a version in modern English that has the deuteroca
sswire.org
> Betreff: Re: [sword-devel] Apocrypha/Deutercanonical Books
>
> Barry wrote, " I know Xiphos isn't up to it yet, "
>
> But it supports av11n according to
> http://crosswire.org/wiki/Choosing_a_SWORD_program#Module_Support
> http://crosswire.org/wik
Barry wrote, " I know Xiphos isn't up to it yet, "
But it supports av11n according to
http://crosswire.org/wiki/Choosing_a_SWORD_program#Module_Support
http://crosswire.org/wiki/Choosing_a_SWORD_program#Module_Support
Am I missing something here?
Is there a distinction between having a Yes in
ing.
SWORDWeb supports av11n.
Troy
>
> Peter
>
>
> Original-Nachricht
>> Datum: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:24:04 -0400
>> Von: DM Smith
>> An: bdr...@crosswire.org, SWORD Developers\' Collaboration Forum
>>
>> Betreff: Re: [sword-de
tum: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:24:04 -0400
> Von: DM Smith
> An: bdr...@crosswire.org, SWORD Developers\' Collaboration Forum
>
> Betreff: Re: [sword-devel] Apocrypha/Deutercanonical Books
> On 10/22/2010 11:08 AM, Barry Drake wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 04:54 -0700,
I have no reason to think that Bibletime does not support these modules. I'm
not at my machine, so I don't know for sure, but I believe it does.
--Greg
On Oct 22, 2010 10:24 AM, "DM Smith" wrote:
> On 10/22/2010 11:08 AM, Barry Drake wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 04:54 -0700, Chris Little wrote
On 10/22/2010 11:08 AM, Barry Drake wrote:
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 04:54 -0700, Chris Little wrote:
DRC& KJVA are already posted for testing. LXX is more complicated and
not currently supported.
Apologies for going over old ground - which (if any) of the present
front-ends can handle these modu
Engineer
+1 (310) 849-4993
http://chrisbryant.bol.ucla.edu/
- Message from bdr...@crosswire.org -
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 16:08:42 +0100
From: Barry Drake
Reply-To: bdr...@crosswire.org, SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Apocrypha/Deutercano
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 04:54 -0700, Chris Little wrote:
> DRC & KJVA are already posted for testing. LXX is more complicated and
> not currently supported.
Apologies for going over old ground - which (if any) of the present
front-ends can handle these modules? I know Xiphos isn't up to it yet,
bu
On 10/21/2010 2:36 PM, Karl Winterling wrote:
What's the current status of work on supporting the Apocrypha or
Deutercanonical Books? I'm willing to work on this and possibly
producing a full DRC (or KJV with Apocrypha, or LXX) module. I haven't
looked at the source code, but supporting a large
For the situation for the DRC modules, see
http://www.crosswire.org/bugs/browse/MOD-150
http://www.crosswire.org/bugs/browse/MOD-150 .
David
--
View this message in context:
http://sword-dev.350566.n4.nabble.com/Apocrypha-Deutercanonical-Books-tp3006612p3007034.html
Sent from the SWORD Dev mai
Karl,
The SWORD engine already supports av11n. See
http://crosswire.org/wiki/Alternate_Versification
http://crosswire.org/wiki/Alternate_Versification
JSword is not that far yet.
Not all front-end applications can make full use of such modules that have
av11n.
David
--
View this message in
Hi
On 7 Jul 2001, at 20:00, Chris Little wrote:
> Book ordering was covered in my last comment. I definitely think we should
> do that.
> Chapters per book and verses per chapter would both be handled when we go
> back to using cps & bks files, as we're planning (at least for modules th
> How about including more of canon.h & locales into the module, maybe into
> module.conf, or in a new file with a format conducive to loading it in and
> using it... so that each module gets to specify it's book ordering,
> chapters per book, verses per chapter, original book name, sword project
> > There should be a way to query which books are available. At
> the Moment BT
> > uses a workaround (checks for nt and ot files and displays / hides the
> > corresponding books). As we are in the 1.5.x tree api changes
> are possible,
> > right?
>
> I thought about this a bit after writing m
> > 1) Should it be added now? I would just be the addition of another
> > testament to our current canon. It couldn't be turned off easily. We
> > could just wait until we start working on 1.7.
>
> That depends on how easy this would be.
I could probably throw the changes into the canon.h an
> 1) Should it be added now? I would just be the addition of another
> testament to our current canon. It couldn't be turned off easily. We
> could just wait until we start working on 1.7.
That depends on how easy this would be.
> 2) Where should the additional testament be placed? Before or
23 matches
Mail list logo
