We don't need to discuss it because it has already been defined, I believe fairly exhaustively. I would guess we discussed it 4-5 years ago.
If anyone wants to, I'm sure it would be appreciated if the private protocol details were copied from the email archives into the wiki. --Chris DJ Ortley wrote: > Should we now discuss standardizing implementations? Are people in > favor of doing that? > > -DJ > > On Dec 10, 2007 10:02 AM, Karl Kleinpaste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Daniel Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> Reading your post reminded me of a >>> discussion earlier this year. I searched and found the thread I >>> remembered. It talks about individually implemented Sword protocols. >> ... >>> GnomeSword - sword:// >>> "GS understands "sword://ModuleName/KeyIntoThatModule" where the key >>> is obviously a verse reference for Bibles and commentaries, but just >>> as easily is a treekey for genbooks and lexdicts." >> GnomeSword does this for both sword:// and bible:// equivalently, >> implemented by creating needed GConf keys in /desktop/gnome/url-handlers. >> >> There has never been a standard defined for what should be done with >> sword:// and bible://, which created a vacuum to be filled by individual >> implementers, so we've each done something appropriate for our >> respective environments. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sword-devel mailing list: [email protected] >> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel >> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page >> > > _______________________________________________ > sword-devel mailing list: [email protected] > http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel > Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: [email protected] http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
