Re: [sword-devel] Av11n and coverage

[Kahunapule Michael Johnson]

As I am working on the source for one of hundreds of Bible translations that I have processed recently, I'm amazed at the variations and spottiness of the scope of translations, especially with respect to Old Testament portions. The number of variations is almost as high as the number of translations, because of their various states of incompleteness. They don't all come in nice, neat ranges. Individual books may start late, have multiple holes in them, and/or start early. It is all about where the translators choose to spend their limited time. And sometimes, they have to quit before they are done for a variety of reasons. Sometimes I'm working with a translation in progress, and more will be done, but sometimes there is nobody on the horizon to take over a translation project. All of that to say this: my preferred way for a Bible study program to act is to automatically adapt to display the verses that it actually finds. If a conf entry describing the scope of the translation is optional or required, it should be VERY flexible. I hope to be converting over 200 translations to Sword format, soon, most of which are covered by a Creative Commons BY-ND-NC license (with extra permission on the ND to change file formats without changing the actual text or punctuation). Michael eBible.org On 02/14/2012 10:12 PM, Nic Carter wrote: My very late reply to this whole discussion: I love the idea of a scope.  As Ben points out, a user would be able to tell before they install a module that a commentary is only for specific books of the Bible or a Bible module is NT or OT only.  After that, we would easily be able to determine which books to display for navigation purposes.  If there was a method in the engine, Troy points out that it can be very optimised, which would be good for post-installation, but how optimised will it be for running on handheld devices (which I guess is the main scenario I am interested in!)? I think I would rather that the scope was set manually in each conf and wasn't something that maintainers had to run on their repositories or anything like that.  For a majority of modules out there, an empty scope would be sufficient, as long as we defined an empty or non-existant scope reverted to ALL (based on the v11n) or something like that.  :) Thanks, ybic nic...  :)

_______________________________________________
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