I don't see osis2mod going away. I see a web service as a way for those
with Windows and with a fast Internet connection to do module
submission. Since it will do binary uploads, it will be faster than
email to upload, which increases the size of binary attachments by
4/3-rds. It may be sufficient for linux and slow connections too. BTW,
I'd like to see shell and bat scripts that provides the same "tool
chain" as the web service.
There are two different points at which we are concerned with
compatibility: With the engine and with the OSIS standard. By and large,
it is best for osis2mod to build modules which are compatible with the
oldest version of the SWORD engine as possible. We had stayed compatible
with 1.5.6 for the longest of times. Recently we had to upgrade to 1.6
(1.5.12?) in order to support v11n. With that we also changed the
handling of pre-verse material. I anticipate that until the next big
thing comes along osis2mod will stay compatible with 1.6.
The other is the OSIS standard. As time goes by we add more and more
support for the whole of OSIS xml. The start of this thread was to add
support for other legal constructs, i.e. div in header and also comments.
One of the features of tei2mod is that it suggests a minimal conf. We
should do the same for osis2mod and the web service. It'd also be cool
if they could take a supplied conf and parse it to determine runtime
parameters.
In Him,
DM
On 04/05/2010 01:49 PM, Brian J. Dumont wrote:
I would be concerned about this and how it might be implemented. I have
packaged a number of very large modules and regularly compile (osis2mod
or xml2mod as the case may be) updates to see how it's changing as I
update.
I have a relatively slow broadband connection. It would be painful as a
web service every hour or so, and I fear that if there is both a web
service and a program, that they may get out of sync.
Brian
On 04/05/2010 01:24 PM, Daniel Owens wrote:
Yes, I agree, and if there were a feedback mechanism for the module
creator to let them know how to start fixing an OSIS file or conf
file, it would save Chris (or whoever else approves modules) time on
the basic stuff.
Daniel
On 4/5/2010 11:09 AM, DM Smith wrote:
This is a great idea. Rather than emailing source to modules at
crosswire dot org, one could upload it via a web service. We could
have stages of validation (xmllint) and construction (osis2mod). Such
a service could evaluate the quality of the submission.
In Him,
DM
On 04/05/2010 12:01 PM, Weston Ruter wrote:
Why not turn osis2mod into a web service? Then it wouldn't matter
how it is implemented since it would be abstracted away by the web
service interface. It could use the best XML libraries available
today and written in the programming language of choice, both of
which would make maintenance and the addition of new features much
easier.
Weston
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 5:55 AM, Manfred Bergmann
<manfred.bergm...@me.com<mailto:manfred.bergm...@me.com>> wrote:
Hi DM.
Am 05.04.2010 um 13:21 schrieb DM Smith:
> Regarding using a "real" parser, it is a good idea. But we
don't want SWORD to be dependant on an external parser.
What's the reason for that?
I could understand if it would mean for the user to install
certain libraries manually but when the sources can be integrated
into the project and has the appropriate licence then why not?
Manfred
>
> On 02/04/2010 05:31 AM, John Zaitseff wrote:
>> Dear SWORD developers,
>>
>> Firstly, thanks for developing the SWORD library! I have been
using
>> this library, in conjunction with the BibleTime front-end, for
many
>> years.
>>
>> I have recently started to develop some OSIS documents of my
own.
>> In doing so, I found that the XML parser in osis2mod is somewhat
>> fragile---something that you are, no doubt, aware of.
>>
>> In particular, osis2mod does not handle XML comments at all, nor
>> does it correctly parse the<header> element. Being able to
handle
>> XML comments is, I think, quite important---I like to
document the
>> SVN revision ID, for example, in an XML comment.
>>
>> Furthermore, the osis2mod XML parser looks for the first
<div> in
>> the document, no matter where that occurs. In particular, if
the
>> OSIS document includes a<revisionDesc> tag in the header, it
will
>> have<p> tags as well---which will be translated by
transformBSP()
>> into<div> tags---and get used as the starting point for the
>> document!
>>
>> For this reason, I have generated a quick patch that will solve
>> these particular problems. Could you please apply it to the SVN
>> head for utilities/osis2mod.cpp. Comments are handled
similar to
>> spaces: they are skipped. And handleToken() now looks for the
first
>> <div> after the</revision> end tag.
>>
>> In general, I think that (perhaps eventually) the proper way to
>> parse XML is to use a library like libxml---which is designed
>> specifically for this purpose.
>>
>> Yours truly,
>>
>> John Zaitseff
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
