Jim,

Breaking up your summary post so we can address the requested additions 
separately.

When you say:

<osis:verse (at)type='alternate'>

it is not clear to me what you would be encoding.

Do you mean an alternative reading? As in some mss. read sort of thing?

The <note> element has an enumerated type of "alternative."

Since <note> can contain <verse>, is there a problem with:

<verse>blah, blah <note type="alternative"><verse
osisID="">blah, 
blah</verse></note></verse>

Recalling that <note> are entered where they apply to the text and 
whether displayed in a footer, in the margin, at the back of the 
document, is a matter of rendering.

If your requirement is to render (this is not OSIS encoding but display):

verse: Here is my verse.

Followed by, possibly indented or otherwise typographically offset:

(some mss. read) Here is our verse.

as part of the "main" text, doesn't the use of <note> capture that?

The reason I suggest this is that <note> already provides a mechanism if 
  this is what you want to do and to allow <verse (at)type="alternative">

would give us two equally valid ways of doing the same thing.

That is not a killer argument for me since you could add an XSLT 
transform for the two cases but increasing the number of valid ways to 
do it in one document could lead to inconsistency and hence misses in 
the rendering process.

Thinking here of people who decide to write their own stylesheets and 
will pick up on either the use of <note> or <verse> to indicate 
alternative readings/translations and not the other.

Thanks for the listing, more replies a little later today.

Hope you are at the start of a great day!

Patrick

[...]

Sometimes  you find a verse as

4 (5) This is the verse

where the 5 is an "alternate verse number" (different versification 
scheme).

Samples attached and sent to Patrick directly as it looks like 
attachements are stripped on the list.


again the htm give some info but formatting isn't there because of broken 
links in isolated examples.

Jim Albright
704 843-0582
Wycliffe Bible Translators






Patrick Durusau <Patrick.Durusau(at)sbl-site.org>
08/18/2004 05:06 AM
Please respond to osis-user

 
        To:     osis-user(at)whi.wts.edu
        cc: 
        Subject:        [osis-user] <osis:verse (at)type='alternate'>


Jim,

Breaking up your summary post so we can address the requested additions 
separately.

When you say:

<osis:verse (at)type='alternate'>

it is not clear to me what you would be encoding.

Do you mean an alternative reading? As in some mss. read sort of thing?

The <note> element has an enumerated type of "alternative."

Since <note> can contain <verse>, is there a problem with:

<verse>blah, blah <note type="alternative"><verse
osisID="">blah, 
blah</verse></note></verse>

Recalling that <note> are entered where they apply to the text and 
whether displayed in a footer, in the margin, at the back of the 
document, is a matter of rendering.

If your requirement is to render (this is not OSIS encoding but display):

verse: Here is my verse.

Followed by, possibly indented or otherwise typographically offset:

(some mss. read) Here is our verse.

as part of the "main" text, doesn't the use of <note> capture that?

The reason I suggest this is that <note> already provides a mechanism if 
  this is what you want to do and to allow <verse (at)type="alternative">

would give us two equally valid ways of doing the same thing.

That is not a killer argument for me since you could add an XSLT 
transform for the two cases but increasing the number of valid ways to 
do it in one document could lead to inconsistency and hence misses in 
the rendering process.

Thinking here of people who decide to write their own stylesheets and 
will pick up on either the use of <note> or <verse> to indicate 
alternative readings/translations and not the other.

Thanks for the listing, more replies a little later today.

Hope you are at the start of a great day!

Patrick

[...]

Jim,

Thanks for sending the samples offlist. Made it a lot easier to see what 
you were saying.

Jim_Albright(at)wycliffe.org wrote:[...]

So we are really NOT talking about an alternative verse but an 
alternative numbering from some other reference system that is 
shown/displayed along side the number from the (one presumes) present 
reference system?

I am also assuming that somewhere else in the work it is indicated this 
is the practice in this edition and what other reference system is meant 
by that display?

Hmmmm, looks more and more like a note to me, one whose content is 
displayed inline.

That is to say:

<verse osisID="Gen.32.1"><note type="variant">2</note>.....

Noting that the reference at the very bottom of your post is an entry 
for: Verse Number Alternate, which says to see also Verse Number In Note.

Really think we need to separate out treatment of verses and their 
alternatives, from treatment of verse numbering. To some degree I would 
find it confusing to have <verse type="alternative"> and all it 
contained was a number. Seems contrary to the notion of a verse.

More comments before lunch, hopefully.

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick


[...]

I realize that Jim's actual request deals with something else, but...

Patrick Durusau wrote:[...]

I think this is specifically why we have the <rdg> element, e.g. 
<verse>blah,
blah<note><rdg>blah</rdg></note></verse>

--Chris

Patrick Durusau wrote:
[...][...][...]

This we've definitely discussed before.  I think it was Todd's 
suggestion originally, but there was general consent (or at least a lack 
of any motivated dissent), to use the osisID itself to note alternate 
versifications.

If you have multiple versifications, you identify them in the header as 
different works.  Then you would place multiple osisIDs with different 
workIDs on verses, as in <verse osisID="systemA:Gen.32.1 
systemB:Gen.32.2">...</verse>.

This also provides a method for including containing multiple works 
that share a large portion of their content within a single document, 
such as Protestant & Catholic editions that will vary in versification, 
  in which version of Esther & Daniel they use, and in whether they use 
the deuterocanonicals.

--Chris

Chris,

Sorry, was early and I did not think about checking the archive of posts 
I have before answering.

Guess I should run my concordancing software against the archive before 
trying to push along much further.

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick

Chris Little wrote:[...][...]
>>>
>>> 4 (5) This is the verse
>>>
>>> where the 5 is an "alternate verse number" (different
versification 
>>> scheme).
>>>[...][...]

[...]

Glad the graphics help. We have a problem of viewpoint. Since I have a 
div/p view then reference to verse means the verse number rather than some 
other content. In TE I call the verse number "Verse_Number" so it is 
unambiguous. So in OSIS 

So I need a concept of "Verse Number in Note" so we can display just the 
verse number 
<verse osisID="Gen.32.1"/><note type="variant">2</note>.....

The verse number is milestone in my world.
This is based on the need to display context to a translator so we on 
purpose make it hard to get JUST a verse and easy to get the paragraph it 
is a part of.
This is to encourage contextual translation rather than focusing on word 
for word translation.


How do I know that this is a verse variant as opposed to a inline textual 
variant?


Jim Albright
704 843-0582
Wycliffe Bible Translators






Patrick Durusau <Patrick.Durusau(at)sbl-site.org>
08/18/2004 09:06 AM
Please respond to osis-user

 
        To:     osis-user(at)whi.wts.edu
        cc:     Jim Albright <Jim_Albright(at)wycliffe.org>
        Subject:        Re: [osis-user] <osis:verse (at)type='alternate'>


Jim,

Thanks for sending the samples offlist. Made it a lot easier to see what 
you were saying.

Jim_Albright(at)wycliffe.org wrote:[...]

So we are really NOT talking about an alternative verse but an 
alternative numbering from some other reference system that is 
shown/displayed along side the number from the (one presumes) present 
reference system?

I am also assuming that somewhere else in the work it is indicated this 
is the practice in this edition and what other reference system is meant 
by that display?

Hmmmm, looks more and more like a note to me, one whose content is 
displayed inline.

That is to say:

<verse osisID="Gen.32.1"><note type="variant">2</note>.....

Noting that the reference at the very bottom of your post is an entry 
for: Verse Number Alternate, which says to see also Verse Number In Note.

Really think we need to separate out treatment of verses and their 
alternatives, from treatment of verse numbering. To some degree I would 
find it confusing to have <verse type="alternative"> and all it 
contained was a number. Seems contrary to the notion of a verse.

More comments before lunch, hopefully.

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick


[...]

This looks good to me as it provides an unambiguous way of talking about 
different versifications.

Jim Albright
704 843-0582
Wycliffe Bible Translators






Chris Little <chrislit(at)crosswire.org>
08/18/2004 09:59 AM
Please respond to osis-user

 
        To:     osis-user(at)whi.wts.edu
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: [osis-user] <osis:verse (at)type='alternate'>


Patrick Durusau wrote:
[...]
[...][...][...]
[...]

This we've definitely discussed before.  I think it was Todd's 
suggestion originally, but there was general consent (or at least a lack 
of any motivated dissent), to use the osisID itself to note alternate 
versifications.

If you have multiple versifications, you identify them in the header as 
different works.  Then you would place multiple osisIDs with different 
workIDs on verses, as in <verse osisID="systemA:Gen.32.1 
systemB:Gen.32.2">...</verse>.

This also provides a method for including containing multiple works 
that share a large portion of their content within a single document, 
such as Protestant & Catholic editions that will vary in versification, 
  in which version of Esther & Daniel they use, and in whether they use 
the deuterocanonicals.

--Chris


[...]

Jim,

Just checking, your second post, responding to Chris's better memory 
than mine of the solution to this problem is acceptable to you?

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick


Jim_Albright(at)wycliffe.org wrote:[...][...][...]

[...]

yes.   Chris's  note is better way to handle it.

Jim Albright
704 843-0582
Wycliffe Bible Translators






Patrick Durusau <Patrick.Durusau(at)sbl-site.org>
08/19/2004 08:41 AM
Please respond to osis-user

 
        To:     osis-user(at)whi.wts.edu
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: [osis-user] <osis:verse (at)type='alternate'>


Jim,

Just checking, your second post, responding to Chris's better memory 
than mine of the solution to this problem is acceptable to you?

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick


Jim_Albright(at)wycliffe.org wrote:[...]
some [...]
[...]
it [...]
[...]
textual [...]
[...][...][...]
[...]
Note.[...]

[...]