Re: [sword-devel] Versification test modules in CrossWire Experimental ...

[Andrew T.]

Is this just a matter of creating the canon_xxx.h files or is there more to
it?  I've been playing around with alternate versifications (creating
canon_xxx.h files and them modifying versificationmgr.cpp to support).  But
I'm not a professional programmer even if I dabble ..

On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:53 AM David Haslam  wrote:

> Would somebody like to volunteer to create the missing *Versification
> test modules* in CrossWire Experimental?
>
> i.e. For all those *av11n* more recent than for
> MinimumVersion=1.6.1
> SwordVersionDate=2009-12-22
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> David
>
> Sent with ProtonMail  Secure Email.
>
> ___
> 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
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] milestone element, osisRef attribute

[Andrew T.]

In general I've found the osisCore.2.1.1.xsd file to be incompatible with
claims made in the OSIS 2.1 User Manual:
https://www.crosswire.org/osis/OSIS%202.1.1%20User%20Manual%2006March2006.pdf

It was something of an epiphany to find that people had been making
incremental improvements to the osisCore.2.1.1.xsd file:
https://wiki.crosswire.org/OSIS_211_CR

To many module-makers issues with the osisCore.2.1.1.xsd file itself are
not obvious.

While the copy called osisCore.2.1.1-cw-latest.xsd
solved
many of the most egregious issues, there still appears to be as of yet
unidentified OsisCore issues in-congruent with with the User Manual.
Peter, is it possible the issue you describe is one such example?
Regardless, there should likely be, at some point in the future, a
commitment to a review/refresh/update of osisCore itself subject of course
to project priority.



On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 10:02 AM David Haslam  wrote:

> Is the Uighur translation being maintained using ParaTExt ?
>
> If so, what was used for the conversion from USFM to OSIS?
>
> IMHO, to maintain the controlled version of a Bible translation in OSIS
> XML would be terribly unwieldy, so it’s nigh on certain that the user space
> x-prefix attributes (etc) must result from a script.
>
> They don’t come from any of the Python scripts we are familiar with, such
> as adyeths u2o.py
>
> Best regards,
>
> David
>
> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 14:45, Peter Von Kaehne  wrote:
>
> > Von: "David Haslam" 
> > What does the Uighur translation team envisage as the practical use of
> osisRef in the OSIS example given?
> > What would we expect SWORD to do with it?
>
> Reading the OSIS source, my best reading of the purpose of the marker is
> to provide an alternative verse start and end reference
> "This is Romans 14:23, but you could also have it as Romans 16:26" or some
> such. I think the source is convoluted, has too many extensions which are
> probably by and large irrelevant - but this is how I read it.
>
> What should SWORD do? Good question - maybe nothing at this moment, but
> always consider - we do not write modules for the current engine, but we
> try and encode everything and if rthere is enough demand by way of new
> encodings in new modules we extend the engine to cover that. So, up to a
> point I am perfectly happy with having plenty codes in modules which is
> ignored at this moment in time. A time may well come when it becomes
> useful. Particularly as for many things a CSS setting is all that is
> required. Not sure here.
>
>
> Peter
>
> > 30965  > sID="Rom.14.23 Rom.14.24 Rom.14.25 Rom.14.26" type="x-vsys-
> > fitted"/> > annotateType="x-vsys-source"/>Лекин бирәр йемәкликкә шәк кәлтүрүп
> > туруп, йәнә шу йемәкликни йегән киши вижданиниң әйиплишигә учрайду.
> > Чүнки у киши өзи йегән йемәкликниң тоғра екәнлигигә ишәнч қилалмиди.
> > Тоғра екәнлигигә ишәнч йоқ һалда қилинған һәр қандақ иш
> > гунадур. > annotateType="x-vsys-source" osisRef="Rom.14.24"/> > osisRef="Rom.14.25"/> > annotateRef="Rom.16.27" annotateType="x-vsys-source"
> > osisRef="Rom.14.26"/> > annotateRef="Rom.14.23" annotateType="x-vsys-source"/>
>
> ___
> 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
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] Dead Sea Scrolls copyright discussion

[Andrew T.]

Tom, PD is 'public domain'.  Public Domain (PD) refers materials that are
not or no longer protected by intellectual property laws such as copyright,
trademark etc.

To confuse, different jurisdictions have different criteria for materials
to enter into the Public Domain.  For example see the section labelled
'Crown Copyright, Letters Patent and the KJV here:
https://wiki.crosswire.org/CrossWire_KJV



On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:54 AM Tom Sullivan  wrote:

> Peter:
>
> Thanks for your reply. Please excuse my ignorance: What is a "PD
> document"? Thanks.
>
> Tom
>
>
> Tom Sullivan
> i...@beforgiven.info
> FAX: 815-301-2835
> -
> Great News!
> God created you, owns you and gave you commands to obey.
> You have disobeyed God - as your conscience very well attests to you.
> God's holiness and justice compel Him to punish you in Hell.
> Jesus Christ became Man, was crucified, buried and rose from the dead
> as a substitute for all who trust in Him, redeeming them from Hell.
> If you repent (turn from your sin) and believe (trust) in Jesus Christ,
> you will go to Heaven. Otherwise you will go to Hell.
> Warning! Good works are a result, not cause, of saving trust.
> More info is at www.esig.beforgiven.info
> Do you believe this? Copy this signature into your email program
> and use the Internet to spread the Great News every time you email.
>
> On 09/10/2018 10:41 AM, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-09-10 at 09:54 -0400, Tom Sullivan wrote:
> >> First, take Matthew Henry's or Calvin's commentaries. They are way
> >> out
> >> of copyright to say the least. Now some publishers may add OCR text,
> >> comments, footnotes, etc. These are copyrightable. Am I correct in
> >> thinking that the original text itself could be safely made into a
> >> module? Surely I am, for these modules are out there. Or am I
> >> missing
> >> something?
> >
> > Yes, the original text can be made a module, any later edition not,
> > unless it without addition or editing simply copies an older public
> > domain edition.
> >
> > With this in mind we will e.g. publish critical editions of the NT from
> > Westcott Hort, but not the newest Aland.
> >
> >> Secondly, there are those who publish images of old works and
> >> manuscripts. They claim copyright to the images in some cases. At
> >> the
> >> same time, if one does not publish the image, but only the bare
> >> original
> >> text, which is not copyrightable, that should be OK for a module. Am
> >> I
> >> correct? I should note that I have seen many cases of republished
> >> old
> >> works that have a copyright label, but it seems to me that they
> >> copyright can only apply to the modern additions.
> >
> > While pictures are copyrightable, I presume using the pictures to
> > transcribe the bare text would make a PD document. Our WLC is something
> > of that kind. Someone somewhere put fingers on keyboard and typed the
> > bare text in.
> >
> >> Thirdly, [..]
> >> In other words, even if a module maker has a
> >> legal
> >> right, it may not be worth the risk in the view of the Sword
> >> community.
> >> Am I correct in my impression that this is a factor?
> >
> > Yes, this is a risk and yes this risk makes us double cautious. In
> > general Bible publishers are kind folk and do not like to sue, but of
> > course they could. FWIW the last time I had to pull a text due to
> > erroneous publication as public domain I was uploading within days a
> > new module with footnotes, crossreferences and the like, significantly
> > improved upon the prior one which was text only. The Bible society in
> > question had coupled their request to pull the old module with an offer
> > of an improved text. But we still do not want to risk this.
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > ___
> > 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
> >
> > __
> > This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> > For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
> > __
> >
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] Dead Sea Scrolls copyright discussion

[Andrew T.]

I agree with Peter.  The original work and the derivative work are separate
cases.

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:42 AM Peter von Kaehne  wrote:

> On Mon, 2018-09-10 at 09:54 -0400, Tom Sullivan wrote:
> > First, take Matthew Henry's or Calvin's commentaries. They are way
> > out
> > of copyright to say the least. Now some publishers may add OCR text,
> > comments, footnotes, etc. These are copyrightable. Am I correct in
> > thinking that the original text itself could be safely made into a
> > module? Surely I am, for these modules are out there. Or am I
> > missing
> > something?
>
> Yes, the original text can be made a module, any later edition not,
> unless it without addition or editing simply copies an older public
> domain edition.
>
> With this in mind we will e.g. publish critical editions of the NT from
> Westcott Hort, but not the newest Aland.
>
> > Secondly, there are those who publish images of old works and
> > manuscripts. They claim copyright to the images in some cases. At
> > the
> > same time, if one does not publish the image, but only the bare
> > original
> > text, which is not copyrightable, that should be OK for a module. Am
> > I
> > correct? I should note that I have seen many cases of republished
> > old
> > works that have a copyright label, but it seems to me that they
> > copyright can only apply to the modern additions.
>
> While pictures are copyrightable, I presume using the pictures to
> transcribe the bare text would make a PD document. Our WLC is something
> of that kind. Someone somewhere put fingers on keyboard and typed the
> bare text in.
>
> > Thirdly, [..]
> > In other words, even if a module maker has a
> > legal
> > right, it may not be worth the risk in the view of the Sword
> > community.
> > Am I correct in my impression that this is a factor?
>
> Yes, this is a risk and yes this risk makes us double cautious. In
> general Bible publishers are kind folk and do not like to sue, but of
> course they could. FWIW the last time I had to pull a text due to
> erroneous publication as public domain I was uploading within days a
> new module with footnotes, crossreferences and the like, significantly
> improved upon the prior one which was text only. The Bible society in
> question had coupled their request to pull the old module with an offer
> of an improved text. But we still do not want to risk this.
>
> Peter
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] Dead Sea Scrolls copyright discussion

[Andrew T.]

Peter, there's agreement here.  Lets not ruin it ok?

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:32 AM Peter von Kaehne  wrote:

> On Mon, 2018-09-10 at 15:35 +0200, Peter Von Kaehne wrote:
> > This matter has been discussed ad nauseam on our mailing list several
> > years ago. Nothing has changed since.
>
> Andrew claims he has not been afforded previous opportunity to discuss
> this matter.
>
> I am not sure what level of debate he needs to be convinced but this
> here was way more extensive than any other module I ever remember.
>
> http://sword-dev.350566.n4.nabble.com/DSS-Biblical-Dead-Sea-Scrolls-bas
> ed-upon-DJD-translations-tt4651220.html#a4651221
> 
>
> Peter
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] Dead Sea Scrolls copyright discussion

[Andrew T.]

Yes agree .. except in the case where something being published a rote fact
(facts cannot be copyrighted) .. and derivative works are their own case in
copyright law.  There's no dispute here.

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 9:37 AM Peter Von Kaehne  wrote:

> This matter has been discussed ad nauseam on our mailing list several
> years ago. Nothing has changed since.
>
> All written works including translations are copyrighted until the
> copyright expires.
> We need a permission by the copyright owner or the copyrioght owner
> licenses the text freely.
> If we do not have a permission, nor is there a free license available, we
> will not publish the module.
>
> Nothing complicated there. There are edge cases (publication in Ethiopia
> until recently or Iran until now being among them), this one is not one.
> The translations are safely within all limits of copyright expiry for the
> foreseeable future.  So, if you want the module published, you need to go
> and do the legwork. Speak with publishers and find agreement. Ask them to
> write a letter to Troy or me that they agree with a module being made of
> their text. Until then please cease debating the matter here and please
> cease offering "test modules" on our list.
>
>
>
> *Gesendet:* Montag, 10. September 2018 um 14:15 Uhr
> *Von:* "Andrew T." 
> *An:* "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum" 
> *Betreff:* Re: [sword-devel] Dead Sea Scrolls copyright discussion
>  I welcome honest discussion about it, I thirst for honest discussion
> about it, more than I thirst for censorship at least.  I have looked into
> the copyright status of the DSS.  What you say is partially correct.  Each
> separate manuscript’s translations (as found in Discoveries in Judean
> Desert (DJD) or other sources) is held separately by DJD (or the other
> sources) according to the copyright expressed in each of the publication
> volumes.  This copyright has been upheld by the Supreme Court of Israel.
>
> If you want details, here's a listing on a scroll by scroll basis:
> https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/scrolls_deadsea/inventory/cave01.htm
>
> For example, the Genesis scroll and the Isaiah scroll:
> *1Q1 (1QGen) 1QGenesis* *ß*
> D. Barthélemy, *Discoveries in the Judaean Desert I* (DJD I) (Oxford
> 1955), 49-50, pl. VIII.
>
> *1QIsa 1QIsaiaha **ß*
> M. Burrows (ed.) with the assistance of J. C. Trever and W. H. Brownlee, *The
> Dead Sea Scrolls of St. Mark's Monastery*, vol. I, pls. I-LIV.
>
> Now there are other translations of these scrolls, the above two are the
> most common and most widely used.  However, the textual content of the
> scrolls themselves in Hebrew or paleo-Hebrew, being rote fact, is not
> copyrightable.
> https://www.newmediarights.org/business_models/artist/are_facts_copyrighted
>
> Facts such as the “Boston Celtics lost to the Toronto Raptors with a score
> of 118-105” cannot be copyrighted, in Europe, N.America, or Russia.  Chess
> games, and their movements cannot be copyrighted (there are cases of
> copyright disputes over the publishing of chess games that have established
> this).  The writing on the scrolls is factual, not the product of modern
> scholarship.  So the text itself can be published, by anyone, for any
> reason.  This is the publishing of fact.
>
> If there is to be discussion about copyright and the DSS the case of
> publishing original language copies, There should be no concern.  There are
> publicly available copies of both manuscript images (can't use the images
> themselves though, need to transcribe from the images) and there are
> textual copies.
>
> From Peter's perspective, the issues surrounding the publication of the
> DSS in translation, because it involves copyright needs to sorted out in a
> way acceptable to this community.  I agree.  I would suggest taking exactly
> the same approach as  Martin G. Abegg Jr., Peter Flint, Eugene Ulrich in
> their book 'The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated
> for the First Time into English".  This book is a derivative work, and
> Abegg, Flint and Ulrich credit the translators and copyright holder's
> explicitly.
>
> Therefore for this community's concern to be addressed, what's needed is
> for Peter to understand on what basis Abegg, Flint, and Ulrich re-used the
> copyrighted translations of others; what the constraints of publishing
> derivative works are (possibly according to different jurisdictions); and
> forge a way ahead, or not according to best judgement and community
> discussion.
>
> As for me, so long as there is transparency in these discussions, respect,
> due consideration and no bullying,

Re: [sword-devel] Copyright, modules, mailing list

[Andrew T.]

Peter, what offered is to participate in civil discussion, and I will
honour that offer, as I hope you will too.

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 9:23 AM Peter Von Kaehne  wrote:

>
> You are being told not to discuss your rejected modules, offering test
> modules or distribute modules. As every single technical enquiry sent by
> you was coupled with just this, you are asked to refrain from that too.
>
>
> *Gesendet:* Montag, 10. September 2018 um 14:05 Uhr
> *Von:* "Andrew T." 
> *An:* "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum" 
> *Betreff:* Re: [sword-devel] Copyright, modules, mailing list
> All of this was very helpful and I think it does expose the raw point
> here.  I haven’t been afforded the opportunity to present the case for DSS
> yet - you won’t allow me to participate in it.  But even if that’s the case
> that’s not what I react to.
>
> When I ask other questions, legitimate questions, about module
> construction, error questions for example, I get hostilility.  This
> community should not have its lepers! Please let’s agree to let that stop.
> I understand Michael’s point, that you are trying to protect this
> community.  You should be lauded for it; but there’s a right way and a
> wrong way.  Telling members to ‘move on’ is not in the same spirit as
> laying out detailed posts about community practice and expectation.
>
> With respect to DSS publication, Ill start a separate thread to keep
> threads consistent.  Please, all be civil and patient on that thread.
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 1:54 PM ref...@gmx.net  wrote:
>
>> All of these in my last post are more or less real life examples. Stuff
>> we have seen and I have dealt with. The examples are just that. In the end
>> there are sometimes judgment calls, particularly where things are tricky.
>> Non signature to Berne and late introduction of copyrights is really tricky
>> as there are all kinds of implications. None of us are lawyers and as
>> Michael points out, a visit by the copyright police could cause real grief.
>> So we are very cautious, maybe sometimes too cautious.
>>
>> The DSS modules are English texts, scholarly translations from the qumran
>> scrolls. Given the time scales, there is no doubt that the English
>> translations are in copyright. Only a fool will debate this. So , while we
>> would be delighted to publish them, we can only do so if we get either
>> specific permission by the copyright holders to publish them or are pointed
>> at convincing verbiage by the publisher that anyone who wants can freely
>> redistribute, as long as they abide by conditions x, y or x. There is NO
>> other way we would ever contemplate to publish these. Nor is there any need
>> to discuss this further. Nor do we want links or offers to access to
>> modules created despite our refusal to contemplate these modules further on
>> our mailing list
>>
>> There is ample discussion of these modules in our archive, which I might
>> bump up if I come round to it. The bottom line is that we neither received
>> permissions from the publisher nor were pointed at relevant free use
>> verbiage, but instead were entertained by increasing curious interpretation
>> of the law as we do (not) know it. Any objection to this was countered with
>> more of what you see already unfolding on the other thread and here
>> presumably now soon too.
>>
>> There are points at which I lose my will to live. The DSS "debates" have
>> often brought me close to that. If in the course of this I have offended,
>> upset or worried anyone other than the originator of these debate, then I
>> am very sorry. In that particular direction I have though a very clear
>> conscience. Unwillingness to abide by community rules will ultimately lead
>> to exclusion from the community. New inclusion is always possible, but it
>> requires at least some clear indication of willingness to abide now by the
>> rules.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>> autocorrects.
>>
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Copyright, modules, mailing list
>> From: ref...@gmx.net
>> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>> CC:
>>
>>
>>
>> Good question, much is ad hoc but in the end this is how things usually
>> run:
>>
>> 1) "I am working on this Bible text in my language. The text us ancient,
>> around 200 years old, but still very relevant for my country's church. I
>> have put my source text into Github and would be grateful about some coding
>> advice" tha

Re: [sword-devel] Dead Sea Scrolls copyright discussion

[Andrew T.]

 I welcome honest discussion about it, I thirst for honest discussion about
it, more than I thirst for censorship at least.  I have looked into the
copyright status of the DSS.  What you say is partially correct.  Each
separate manuscript’s translations (as found in Discoveries in Judean
Desert (DJD) or other sources) is held separately by DJD (or the other
sources) according to the copyright expressed in each of the publication
volumes.  This copyright has been upheld by the Supreme Court of Israel.

If you want details, here's a listing on a scroll by scroll basis:
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/scrolls_deadsea/inventory/cave01.htm

For example, the Genesis scroll and the Isaiah scroll:
*1Q1 (1QGen) 1QGenesis* *ß*
D. Barthélemy, *Discoveries in the Judaean Desert I* (DJD I) (Oxford 1955),
49-50, pl. VIII.

*1QIsa 1QIsaiaha **ß*
M. Burrows (ed.) with the assistance of J. C. Trever and W. H. Brownlee, *The
Dead Sea Scrolls of St. Mark's Monastery*, vol. I, pls. I-LIV.

Now there are other translations of these scrolls, the above two are the
most common and most widely used.  However, the textual content of the
scrolls themselves in Hebrew or paleo-Hebrew, being rote fact, is not
copyrightable.
https://www.newmediarights.org/business_models/artist/are_facts_copyrighted

Facts such as the “Boston Celtics lost to the Toronto Raptors with a score
of 118-105” cannot be copyrighted, in Europe, N.America, or Russia.  Chess
games, and their movements cannot be copyrighted (there are cases of
copyright disputes over the publishing of chess games that have established
this).  The writing on the scrolls is factual, not the product of modern
scholarship.  So the text itself can be published, by anyone, for any
reason.  This is the publishing of fact.

If there is to be discussion about copyright and the DSS the case of
publishing original language copies, There should be no concern.  There are
publicly available copies of both manuscript images (can't use the images
themselves though, need to transcribe from the images) and there are
textual copies.

>From Peter's perspective, the issues surrounding the publication of the DSS
in translation, because it involves copyright needs to sorted out in a way
acceptable to this community.  I agree.  I would suggest taking exactly the
same approach as  Martin G. Abegg Jr., Peter Flint, Eugene Ulrich in their
book 'The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated for the
First Time into English".  This book is a derivative work, and Abegg, Flint
and Ulrich credit the translators and copyright holder's explicitly.

Therefore for this community's concern to be addressed, what's needed is
for Peter to understand on what basis Abegg, Flint, and Ulrich re-used the
copyrighted translations of others; what the constraints of publishing
derivative works are (possibly according to different jurisdictions); and
forge a way ahead, or not according to best judgement and community
discussion.

As for me, so long as there is transparency in these discussions, respect,
due consideration and no bullying, of course Ill live within the standards
of the community.



On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 9:06 AM Andrew T.  wrote:

> Please, be patient and civil in this discussion, appreciating that
> copyright and biblical texts are both important and that controversy
> abounds when discussing both.  Everyone's perspective is welcomed here:
>
>
___
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

[sword-devel] Dead Sea Scrolls copyright discussion

[Andrew T.]

Please, be patient and civil in this discussion, appreciating that
copyright and biblical texts are both important and that controversy
abounds when discussing both.  Everyone's perspective is welcomed here:
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] Copyright, modules, mailing list

[Andrew T.]

emains unchanged. " " thanks, sounds really interesting, can you
> point us at where it says that you can freely redistribute?"
>
> 5)" I believe that the Bible should never be copyrighted and have created
> a collection of modules of modern translations to make use of my belief."
> No debate necessary, move on please. But do not stay here.
>
> 6)" I am making use of this scholarly edition, and while it is only 30
> years old, I believe I am justified to make a module because scientist
> crave nothing more than exposure and use of the text as a module should be
> allowed under academic freedom and further interesting theories of
> copyright exemptions in which only I believe, but I am due I am right. ", "
> well, we do not agree and we do not recognise your exemptions on the k away
> as we know it, so please do not advertise or discuss your new modules here.
> "
>
> 7) "I am making use of this scholarly edition and the editors and
> copyright holders are really keen to see it in module form, where can they
> send a letter to confirm this?" "Right here, right here, many thanks,
> brilliant news"
>
> 8) My country is an interesting one, as it has never subscribed to the
> Berne convention, but it introduced copyright in 1987. Everything before is
> under public domain. Can I publish this Bible in my language, it was
> published in 1985.?" Ah, this is an interesting one...
>
>
> This is the process, if you want to call it so. Played itself out hundreds
> of times on sword-devel. Works usually well. Very few people really do not
> get it.
>
>
> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
> autocorrects.
>
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Copyright, modules, mailing list
> From: "Andrew T."
> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
> CC:
>
>
> This is very helpful Peter.  Thank you.
>
> However, I’d like to ask about enforcement.
> Does a module actually need to be submitted to the project to be judged?
> Or is it sufficient to judge modules the project has never seen by simply
> judging the reputation of the person working on them?
>
> What is the process for initiating this scrutiny?
> I ask only because you seem able to judge modules you’ve never seen, while
> casting doubt upon them.
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 6:28 AM ref...@gmx.net  wrote:
>
>> Just as a reminder.
>>
>> CrossWise does respect copyrights and takes in general a very cautious
>> view in these matters.
>>
>> If there is a hint of a doubt regarding the public domain status we do
>> not publish a text unless we have permissions. Whether explicit or via free
>> licensing (Creative Commons and the like). If we believe we require
>> explicit permissions then we welcome the assistance of community members to
>> obtain these, but in the end it will always be the module team or the
>> director who needs to receive the permissions from the copyright owner.
>>
>> In this way we have on occasion forgone texts we really would like to
>> publish and other projects felt free to publish, but we still believe that
>> this approach has born fruit.
>>
>> There are occasionally situations where people decided that the only
>> likely approach to convince a copyright owner to grant permissions is to
>> create a module as showcase. This is a potentially risky undertaking, but
>> clearly who does so believes that the risk is acceptable for them
>> personally. As long as such modules are not discussed (explicitely or
>> implicitly)'or offered on the list for testing purposes or otherwise and as
>> long as these people do not describe themselves as community members of
>> CrossWire to the publishers, there clearly is little risk that this
>> approach will affect the project negatively either legally or
>> reputationwise.
>>
>> Beyond the above, some jurisdictions will permit private use, reuse and
>> transformation of texts otherwise restricted. This is great for
>> individuals, but it does not enable us as an entity to assist with this.
>> Please do not discuss your attempts in this way here.
>>
>> Further, we do not promote or permit onwards distribution of modules
>> unless they are in the public domain or the copyright owners have
>> explicitly permitted such onward distribution.To set up a "mirror" other
>> that non publicly accessible strictly private is not acceptable.
>>
>> Finally there are of course valid debates to be had in general regarding
>> copyright for Biblical texts  and many of us will have private

Re: [sword-devel] Copyright, modules, mailing list

[Andrew T.]

This is very helpful Peter.  Thank you.

However, I’d like to ask about enforcement.
Does a module actually need to be submitted to the project to be judged?
Or is it sufficient to judge modules the project has never seen by simply
judging the reputation of the person working on them?

What is the process for initiating this scrutiny?
I ask only because you seem able to judge modules you’ve never seen, while
casting doubt upon them.


On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 6:28 AM ref...@gmx.net  wrote:

> Just as a reminder.
>
> CrossWise does respect copyrights and takes in general a very cautious
> view in these matters.
>
> If there is a hint of a doubt regarding the public domain status we do not
> publish a text unless we have permissions. Whether explicit or via free
> licensing (Creative Commons and the like). If we believe we require
> explicit permissions then we welcome the assistance of community members to
> obtain these, but in the end it will always be the module team or the
> director who needs to receive the permissions from the copyright owner.
>
> In this way we have on occasion forgone texts we really would like to
> publish and other projects felt free to publish, but we still believe that
> this approach has born fruit.
>
> There are occasionally situations where people decided that the only
> likely approach to convince a copyright owner to grant permissions is to
> create a module as showcase. This is a potentially risky undertaking, but
> clearly who does so believes that the risk is acceptable for them
> personally. As long as such modules are not discussed (explicitely or
> implicitly)'or offered on the list for testing purposes or otherwise and as
> long as these people do not describe themselves as community members of
> CrossWire to the publishers, there clearly is little risk that this
> approach will affect the project negatively either legally or
> reputationwise.
>
> Beyond the above, some jurisdictions will permit private use, reuse and
> transformation of texts otherwise restricted. This is great for
> individuals, but it does not enable us as an entity to assist with this.
> Please do not discuss your attempts in this way here.
>
> Further, we do not promote or permit onwards distribution of modules
> unless they are in the public domain or the copyright owners have
> explicitly permitted such onward distribution.To set up a "mirror" other
> that non publicly accessible strictly private is not acceptable.
>
> Finally there are of course valid debates to be had in general regarding
> copyright for Biblical texts  and many of us will have private views quite
> different from what we uphold as a project. That is fine, as long as we can
> maintain the commitment to the cautious corporate  approach described above
> as a community. Sword-devel is not the place to have lengthy debates on
> these matters and persistently pushing the boundaries in this or any of the
> above matters is not an acceptable thing to do.
>
> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
> autocorrects.
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
> autocorrects.
> ___
> 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
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] Virtual modules (parallelism) & fragmentary texts

[Andrew T.]

Peter, I have never published a module illegally or breached copyright.
What modules do you believe I've submitted that were not bona fide?  Can
you even name a single module I've submitted?  I've asked you for specifics
before and you've not provided them - as God is my witness.

False claims of copyright infringement are the method by which you bully
others away, and justify your questionable conduct. The thing about false
witness is eventually you need to either provide evidence or expose
yourself as false.   So I don't need to dress anything up in pious
language.  Your hostility and brutish behavior towards me is evident to
all.

The last two times I've contacted this list:

1. I asked an honest question about an error message.  You responded with
hostility.
2. I asked about the versification implications of a whiteboard idea.  You
responded with hostility.

Has there been even a single response from you towards me that was not
hostile?  Given that this effort is suppose to be a community effort, it's
odd that it's always you trying to drive willing contributors away.
I agree, our mailing list is not open to distribution of modules which are
not bona fide.  So show me one that convicts me or stop your bullying.
When discussion isn't even about modules, but about error messages, or
whiteboard ideas, how about you exhibit the character Christ calls you to
exhibit?

To try to move this forward and beyond this recurring silliness lets agree
to let the past be the past.  I would sincerely like the opportunity to
contribute to this project without your constant hostility.  Whatever
wrongs you believe I've committed do as Christ commands -  Matt 18:21-22.
 With charity give me the benefit of the doubt and let others see your
faith in action.

P.S. For those who have stumbled on this exchange, the list is public, and
from the archive you can see that Peter's hostile claims are false; and my
response to his hostility has always been charitable.  More than anything
else when a prominent contributor to a so-called Christian project acts in
a way that clearly contradicts the tenets of the faith it calls into
question the faith.





On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 8:56 AM ref...@gmx.net  wrote:

> I think you are mixing up disapproval/dislike of you as a person with
> disapproval of your work and disagreement on distribution of the same via
> our channels.
>
> You have been publishing and announcing on far too many occasions modules
> which we believe to be illegally distributed. Once all is discussed without
> resolution for far too long time in the end only one opinion can prevail,
> and this is our opinion on our lists.
>
> Looking at your latest announcement this has not changed. Our mailing list
> is not open to distribution of modules which are not in our view bona fide
> - quite irrespective of what you think you know better.
>
> You can dress this all up in as pious language as you like , but the
> bottom line is that your posts on this list are quite grossly and
> persistently abusive. You are abusing our facilities to promote work we
> asked you to keep of our channels and you are abusing our kindness by
> repeatedly coming out with the same personal accusations.
>
> Do as you like on channels you own but you must abide to our rules on our
> channels, mailing lists and servers. As you feel manifestly unable to do so
> you have no place here.
>
> Peter
>
> P.s. for those who have stumbled into this exchange, Andrew created a set
> of modules from very prominent material we judged to be under copyright. A
> huge discussion happened at the time, he remained entirely unwilling to
> accept that our views should carry on our project. In our view he was
> endangering the project in a significant way. Ever since he pops up here
> again, offering his modules up for "testing".
>
>
> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
> autocorrects.
>
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Virtual modules (parallelism) & fragmentary
> texts
> From: "Andrew T."
> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
> CC:
>
>
> I know you do Peter.  Though I am your neighbor, you’ve made your
> hardness-of-heart towards me perfectly clear in previous instances though I
> have not wronged you.  Perhaps God brought me into your life for a reason.
>
>
> Your back-biting gives me opportunity for patience, and forgiveness, and
> Christlikeness.  Thank you for this.  I thank God for it.  Any one who has
> seen our interactions on this list can judge rightly who is modeling the
> savior they profess, and who has hardness of heart.  Has anyone else in
> your life called out your hypocrisy with honest love?  Perhaps they’re
> afraid.
>
>
> Ther

Re: [sword-devel] Virtual modules (parallelism) & fragmentary texts

[Andrew T.]

I know you do Peter.  Though I am your neighbor, you’ve made your
hardness-of-heart towards me perfectly clear in previous instances though I
have not wronged you.  Perhaps God brought me into your life for a reason.


Your back-biting gives me opportunity for patience, and forgiveness, and
Christlikeness.  Thank you for this.  I thank God for it.  Any one who has
seen our interactions on this list can judge rightly who is modeling the
savior they profess, and who has hardness of heart.  Has anyone else in
your life called out your hypocrisy with honest love?  Perhaps they’re
afraid.


Therefore, I encourage you to pray: pray for patience, and God’s wisdom,
pray for the ability to show yourself as a letter from Christ delivered,
written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not in digital
Sword modules, but on tablets of human hearts.  Pray also - that you fully
behold the glory of the Lord, being transformed into the same image, from
one degree of glory to the next. For this comes from the Lord who is the
Spirit (2 Cor 3).


If I ceased to work on this project, whether in public or in silence I
would be accountable to God.  If you block me on the list, as you did
previously, you yourself can account.


Personal stuff aside, have you considered my observations about virtual
modules and versification?



On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 4:40 AM ref...@gmx.net  wrote:

> I think Andrew, it would be all round better if you moved on. Permanently.
>
> There is no place here in this project for you to offer your modules
> whether for "testing" or otherwise.
>
> Thanks
>
> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
> autocorrects.
>
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: [sword-devel] Virtual modules (parallelism) & fragmentary texts
> From: "Andrew T."
> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
> CC:
>
>
> The wiki’s whiteboard shows discussion about support for virtual modules:
> https://wiki.crosswire.org/Whiteboard/Virtual_Modules
>
> Specifically the idea of pushing parallelism back to the API has
> potentially great benefit for modules built from incomplete MSS. For
> example, I’ve compared the English translation of say the Dead Sea Scrolls
> 4Q2 Genesis found here:
>
> http://dssenglishbible.com/genesis%201.htm
>
> With the LEB translation (v2.7 contained in the Sword project) or found
> here:
>
> https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gen+1%3A1-2&version=LEB
>
> I’ve found similar enough translation style and word choice between the
> two that a case could be made they are complimentary.  In terms of
> completeness the DSS are fragmentary  compared to Masoretic text (MT).  Yet
> more than 20% of the scrolls found at Qumran are copies of books found in
> the Hebrew bible (published largely in Discoveries in the Judean Desert
> (DJD)); show us what scripture looked like in the century preceding Christ;
> disclose ancient writing styles and spellings; and reveal the formation of
> biblical canon (exhibiting source elements of, Masoretic text, LXX and
> Samaritan Pentateuch. For example see:
>
>
> https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=sba
>
> Yet creating a sword module from such important yet still fragmentary
> material leaves gaps most Sword applications don’t do well with. (I’m
> speaking from experience.  I have such a module)
>
> However the idea of virtual modules might solve this.  Consider the syntax:
>
> In the beginning, God created the heavens and the 
> earth —
> In the beginning, God created the heavens and the 
> earth.
>
> ...
>
> And God said, Let the waters under the heavens be 
> gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so.
> And God said, “Let the waters underneath the 
> heavens be gathered together in once place, and let dr[y land] appear.” And 
> it was so. [And the waters under the heavens gathered together to their 
> place] and the dr[y land] appeared. In 
> the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
>
> Or:
>
> 
> In the beginning, God created the 
> heavens and the earth -
> In the beginning, God created the 
> heavens and the earth.
> 
>
>
> This solves the problem of modules with fragmentary missing bits, buts
> introduces a new problem; namely collision between different
> versification.  Consider, for example, a case where parallel versions
> contain practically the same versification except the latter includes Psalm
> 151.  Does a whole new versification then need to be introduced?  Or how
> about two versions with completely different versifications, or
> non-standard versifications.  (My DSS module mostly agrees with the LXX
> versification save for a handful of exceptions, I thi

[sword-devel] Virtual modules (parallelism) & fragmentary texts

[Andrew T.]

The wiki’s whiteboard shows discussion about support for virtual modules:
https://wiki.crosswire.org/Whiteboard/Virtual_Modules

Specifically the idea of pushing parallelism back to the API has
potentially great benefit for modules built from incomplete MSS. For
example, I’ve compared the English translation of say the Dead Sea Scrolls
4Q2 Genesis found here:

http://dssenglishbible.com/genesis%201.htm

With the LEB translation (v2.7 contained in the Sword project) or found
here:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gen+1%3A1-2&version=LEB

I’ve found similar enough translation style and word choice between the two
that a case could be made they are complimentary.  In terms of completeness
the DSS are fragmentary  compared to Masoretic text (MT).  Yet more than
20% of the scrolls found at Qumran are copies of books found in the Hebrew
bible (published largely in Discoveries in the Judean Desert (DJD)); show
us what scripture looked like in the century preceding Christ; disclose
ancient writing styles and spellings; and reveal the formation of biblical
canon (exhibiting source elements of, Masoretic text, LXX and Samaritan
Pentateuch. For example see:

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=sba

Yet creating a sword module from such important yet still fragmentary
material leaves gaps most Sword applications don’t do well with. (I’m
speaking from experience.  I have such a module)

However the idea of virtual modules might solve this.  Consider the syntax:

In the beginning, God created the heavens
and the earth —
In the beginning, God created the heavens
and the earth.

...

And God said, Let the waters under the
heavens be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it
was so.
And God said, “Let the waters underneath
the heavens be gathered together in once place, and let dr[y land]
appear.” And it was so. [And the waters under the heavens gathered
together to their place] and the dr[y land] appeared. In the beginning God created the heavens and the
earth.

Or:


In the beginning, God created
the heavens and the earth -
In the beginning, God created
the heavens and the earth.



This solves the problem of modules with fragmentary missing bits, buts
introduces a new problem; namely collision between different
versification.  Consider, for example, a case where parallel versions
contain practically the same versification except the latter includes Psalm
151.  Does a whole new versification then need to be introduced?  Or how
about two versions with completely different versifications, or
non-standard versifications.  (My DSS module mostly agrees with the LXX
versification save for a handful of exceptions, I think Ps.151 being one).

So my question: has development on any of this been advanced?  If I create
a module with parallel syntax such as above, is there anyway (or anyone
interested) in testing?
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset

[Andrew T.]

I was able to make progress on this problem.

To share the resolution - I used the FILE: osisCore.2.1.1-cw-latest.xsd
that Tom provided rather than the  FILE: osisCore.2.1.1.xsd originally
downloaded from http://www.bibletechnologies.net/2003/OSIS/namespace.  I
compared the two and indeed the newer one (Tom provided) contained
additional lines which both enabled me to use xmllint to resolve what was
causing my osis2mod errors AND it fixed some of the xml lint errors
occasionally popping up in other modules.  Tom, I think you're osisCore
file fixes problems.

A big thanks to Tom for providing it and indeed Peter you were correct.
The xmllint errors enabled me to find mismatched tags and correct
fundamental problems with the OSIS structure.

That said I think DM Smiths recommendation to build up a module book-wise
is wise.  Im going to try changing my approach in building modules to do
just that.
Thanks all for helpful insights.

~A

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 1:11 PM, DM Smith  wrote:

> Osis2mod does not care much about whether it is actually semantically
> valid OSIS. Just that it is well formed OSIS.
>
> To do this each file has to have a container element surrounding the
> entire content. … should do. But you certainly can
> have each book be a semantically complete OSIS document of one book.
>
> DM
>
> > On Feb 19, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Tom Sullivan  wrote:
> >
> > DM:
> >
> > Can you give some more info on the -a option? Normally, the complete
> OSIS file will have a header, then a body. The body will be broken into
> books. So when running osis2mod the first time, do we repeat the header?
> Does the first segment simply end abruptly without closing tags for the
> body as one would normally do?
> >
> > For example (abbreviated greatly)
> > 
> > 
> >  stuff
> > 
> > 
> >  
> >   more stuff
> >  
> >  now this is where we would normally put the next div if making module
> all at once.
> > 
> > 
> >
> > or
> >
> > without -a:
> > 
> > 
> >  stuff
> > 
> > 
> >  
> >   more stuff
> >  
> >
> > then with -a:
> >  now this is where we would normally put the next div if making module
> all at once.
> > 
> > 
> >
> > OR what?
> >
> > I think you get the drift of my question. (SwordHammer makes modules all
> at once, but it would be helpful in debugging to think about a feature to
> produce just the bad part and show it to the user.)
> >
> > Many thanks.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> > Tom Sullivan
> > i...@beforgiven.info
> > FAX: 815-301-2835
> > -
> > Great News!
> > God created you, owns you and gave you commands to obey.
> > You have disobeyed God - as your conscience very well attests to you.
> > God's holiness and justice compel Him to punish you in Hell.
> > Jesus Christ became Man, was crucified, buried and rose from the dead
> > as a substitute for all who trust in Him, redeeming them from Hell.
> > If you repent (turn from your sin) and believe (trust) in Jesus Christ,
> > you will go to Heaven. Otherwise you will go to Hell.
> > Warning! Good works are a result, not cause, of saving trust.
> > More info is at www.esig.beforgiven.info
> > Do you believe this? Copy this signature into your email program
> > and use the Internet to spread the Great News every time you email.
> >
> > On 02/19/2018 11:17 AM, DM Smith wrote:
> >> Recommend breaking your input into files by book. Run the Osis2mod for
> Genesis as before but the others w -a.
> >> This will incrementally build a module.
> >> Smaller files are better handled by other xml tools.
> >> — DM Smith
> >> From my phone. Brief. Weird autocorrections.
> >> On Feb 19, 2018, at 9:43 AM, Andrew T.  thules...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>> Thank you for your insight. It is appreciated.  I'll scrutinize the
> XML more closely (again).  I find general many of the XML validation tools
> expect small xml files not large ones.  XML can be a pain to find errors in.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 2:16 AM, ref...@gmx.net <mailto:ref...@gmx.net>
> mailto:ref...@gmx.net>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Thanks for confirming that you are of the same spirit as then.
> >>>
> >>>Wrt the technical side, it is the result of a faulty OSIS. I have
> >>>seen it a few times, it has always been a fault in the OSIS. The
> >>>error message cod be more helpful, granted.
> >>>It is too long ago to remember what it was th

Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset

[Andrew T.]

Tom - thank you for your suggestion.  I had been using linux command line
tools and in windows notepad++.  I had forgotten about jedit, but Ill look
at that again.  Many validator tools will tell you there's an error but not
point out where it is.
Is  osisCore.2.1.1-cw-latest.xsd different from  osisCore.2.1.1.xsd?  I
suppose Ill have to find it and compare.

As for being helpful - it is.  At some point its easy to run out of ideas
and every new idea is useful as it provides another place to look.

~A

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 4:18 AM, Tom Sullivan  wrote:

> Y'all:
>
> For future reference: I have found that JEdit, with the XML addon, using
> the Sword xsd, osisCore.2.1.1-cw-latest.xsd, is able to pick up OSIS errors
> and report on their exact location. This process does show some
> discrepancies between OSIS.pdf documentation and what the schema will
> actually accept. JEdit is s-l-o-w. Other software may be better.
>
> Whether that will help avoid the unhelpful message is another matter.
>
> Tom
>
> Tom Sullivan
> i...@beforgiven.info
> FAX: 815-301-2835
> -
> Great News!
> God created you, owns you and gave you commands to obey.
> You have disobeyed God - as your conscience very well attests to you.
> God's holiness and justice compel Him to punish you in Hell.
> Jesus Christ became Man, was crucified, buried and rose from the dead
> as a substitute for all who trust in Him, redeeming them from Hell.
> If you repent (turn from your sin) and believe (trust) in Jesus Christ,
> you will go to Heaven. Otherwise you will go to Hell.
> Warning! Good works are a result, not cause, of saving trust.
> More info is at www.esig.beforgiven.info
> Do you believe this? Copy this signature into your email program
> and use the Internet to spread the Great News every time you email.
>
> On 02/19/2018 02:16 AM, ref...@gmx.net wrote:
>
>> Thanks for confirming that you are of the same spirit as then.
>>
>> Wrt the technical side, it is the result of a faulty OSIS. I have seen it
>> a few times, it has always been a fault in the OSIS. The error message cod
>> be more helpful, granted.
>> It is too long ago to remember what it was the last time, and with the
>> nature of your modules I have little desire to think further.
>>
>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>> autocorrects.
>>
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
>> From: "Andrew T."
>> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>> CC:
>>
>>
>> You showed yourself to be ignorant of the 'Fair Use' clauses of
>> European, American and Canadian copyright law; dogmatic; and a
>> hypocrite trying to assert copyright privilege you don't possess.
>> Further you've never bothered to look at the module I've worked on
>> for 9 years, examine the credits it contains, or check with
>> translators to see if you're fight was a fight they wanted to be
>> fought on their behalf.
>>
>> You should learn to let sleeping dogs lay as you're pride is
>> impairing your judgement.
>> I assume you're trying to find fault because you have no technical
>> insights into the error I'm asking about?
>>
>> ~A
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:32 PM, ref...@gmx.net
>> <mailto:ref...@gmx.net> mailto:ref...@gmx.net>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> So the module you are working on, is, despite the same name as
>> the last one not a copyrighted translation of the Dead Sea
>> scrolls? There was no controversy, the material discusses then
>> is without doubt copyrighted and without doubt you showed
>> yourself as someone who chooses to ignore copyright rules.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>> autocorrects.
>>
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
>> From: "Andrew T." __
>> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum __
>> CC:
>>
>>
>> Peter - thanks for the opportunity but I'm not going to
>> re-open old controversies.
>>
>> ~A
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:23 PM, ref...@gmx.net
>> <mailto:ref...@gmx.net> > <mailto:ref...@gmx.net>> wrote

Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset

[Andrew T.]

Thank you for your insight. It is appreciated.  I'll scrutinize the XML
more closely (again).  I find general many of the XML validation tools
expect small xml files not large ones.  XML can be a pain to find errors
in.

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 2:16 AM, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:

> Thanks for confirming that you are of the same spirit as then.
>
> Wrt the technical side, it is the result of a faulty OSIS. I have seen it
> a few times, it has always been a fault in the OSIS. The error message cod
> be more helpful, granted.
> It is too long ago to remember what it was the last time, and with the
> nature of your modules I have little desire to think further.
>
> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
> autocorrects.
>
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
> From: "Andrew T."
> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
> CC:
>
>
> You showed yourself to be ignorant of the 'Fair Use' clauses of European,
> American and Canadian copyright law; dogmatic; and a hypocrite trying to
> assert copyright privilege you don't possess. Further you've never bothered
> to look at the module I've worked on for 9 years, examine the credits it
> contains, or check with translators to see if you're fight was a fight they
> wanted to be fought on their behalf.
>
> You should learn to let sleeping dogs lay as you're pride is impairing
> your judgement.
> I assume you're trying to find fault because you have no technical
> insights into the error I'm asking about?
>
> ~A
>
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:32 PM, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:
>
>> So the module you are working on, is, despite the same name as the last
>> one not a copyrighted translation of the Dead Sea scrolls? There was no
>> controversy, the material discusses then is without doubt copyrighted and
>> without doubt you showed yourself as someone who chooses to ignore
>> copyright rules.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>> autocorrects.
>>
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
>> From: "Andrew T."
>> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>> CC:
>>
>>
>> Peter - thanks for the opportunity but I'm not going to re-open old
>> controversies.
>>
>> ~A
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:23 PM, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the reminder, but given that this is not a matter of
>>> forgiveness but of respect for copyright and our project's views on this
>>> matter, the reference is not really applicable.
>>>
>>> So I am asking again, have you changed your attitudes since we saw you
>>> last time?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>>> autocorrects.
>>>
>>>
>>>  Original Message 
>>> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
>>> From: "Andrew T."
>>> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>>> CC:
>>>
>>>
>>> Peter, I asked a question about an error message.  Your response
>>> deflected to me.  Is this your way of illustrating Matt 18:22?
>>> Do you know what the error message means or no?
>>>
>>> ~A
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:50 AM, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Has anything changed in your attitude since we saw you last time here?
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>>>> autocorrects.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Original Message 
>>>> Subject: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
>>>> From: "Andrew T."
>>>> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>>>> CC:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm currently using the command:
>>>> /usr/bin/osis2mod . /sword/dss/DSS.osis.xml -z -b 4 -v KJVA
>>>>
>>>> Yet all I'm getting are the following errors:
>>>> Error reading ulCompOffset
>>>> Error reading ulCompOffset
>>>> Error reading ulCompOffset
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> I've created sword modules before, yet I don't recognize this error.
>>>>
>>>> I created 

Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset

[Andrew T.]

You showed yourself to be ignorant of the 'Fair Use' clauses of European,
American and Canadian copyright law; dogmatic; and a hypocrite trying to
assert copyright privilege you don't possess. Further you've never bothered
to look at the module I've worked on for 9 years, examine the credits it
contains, or check with translators to see if you're fight was a fight they
wanted to be fought on their behalf.

You should learn to let sleeping dogs lay as you're pride is impairing your
judgement.
I assume you're trying to find fault because you have no technical insights
into the error I'm asking about?

~A



On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:32 PM, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:

> So the module you are working on, is, despite the same name as the last
> one not a copyrighted translation of the Dead Sea scrolls? There was no
> controversy, the material discusses then is without doubt copyrighted and
> without doubt you showed yourself as someone who chooses to ignore
> copyright rules.
>
> Peter
>
> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
> autocorrects.
>
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
> From: "Andrew T."
> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
> CC:
>
>
> Peter - thanks for the opportunity but I'm not going to re-open old
> controversies.
>
> ~A
>
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:23 PM, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the reminder, but given that this is not a matter of
>> forgiveness but of respect for copyright and our project's views on this
>> matter, the reference is not really applicable.
>>
>> So I am asking again, have you changed your attitudes since we saw you
>> last time?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>> autocorrects.
>>
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
>> From: "Andrew T."
>> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>> CC:
>>
>>
>> Peter, I asked a question about an error message.  Your response
>> deflected to me.  Is this your way of illustrating Matt 18:22?
>> Do you know what the error message means or no?
>>
>> ~A
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:50 AM, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:
>>
>>> Has anything changed in your attitude since we saw you last time here?
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>>> autocorrects.
>>>
>>>
>>>  Original Message 
>>> Subject: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
>>> From: "Andrew T."
>>> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>>> CC:
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm currently using the command:
>>> /usr/bin/osis2mod . /sword/dss/DSS.osis.xml -z -b 4 -v KJVA
>>>
>>> Yet all I'm getting are the following errors:
>>> Error reading ulCompOffset
>>> Error reading ulCompOffset
>>> Error reading ulCompOffset
>>> ...
>>>
>>> I've created sword modules before, yet I don't recognize this error.
>>>
>>> I created the osis.xml file, and I'm fairly confident it is structured
>>> correctly - yet there are fragments missing (as the source of the text I
>>> used to create this document is fragmentary and incomplete).  For example
>>> there is no New Testament, no Esther, no Nehemiah ...)
>>>
>>> Can anyone provide insight as to what this error means?
>>>
>>> ~A
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset

[Andrew T.]

Peter - thanks for the opportunity but I'm not going to re-open old
controversies.

~A

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:23 PM, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:

> Thanks for the reminder, but given that this is not a matter of
> forgiveness but of respect for copyright and our project's views on this
> matter, the reference is not really applicable.
>
> So I am asking again, have you changed your attitudes since we saw you
> last time?
>
> Thanks
>
> Peter
>
> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
> autocorrects.
>
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
> From: "Andrew T."
> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
> CC:
>
>
> Peter, I asked a question about an error message.  Your response deflected
> to me.  Is this your way of illustrating Matt 18:22?
> Do you know what the error message means or no?
>
> ~A
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:50 AM, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:
>
>> Has anything changed in your attitude since we saw you last time here?
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
>> autocorrects.
>>
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
>> From: "Andrew T."
>> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
>> CC:
>>
>>
>> I'm currently using the command:
>> /usr/bin/osis2mod . /sword/dss/DSS.osis.xml -z -b 4 -v KJVA
>>
>> Yet all I'm getting are the following errors:
>> Error reading ulCompOffset
>> Error reading ulCompOffset
>> Error reading ulCompOffset
>> ...
>>
>> I've created sword modules before, yet I don't recognize this error.
>>
>> I created the osis.xml file, and I'm fairly confident it is structured
>> correctly - yet there are fragments missing (as the source of the text I
>> used to create this document is fragmentary and incomplete).  For example
>> there is no New Testament, no Esther, no Nehemiah ...)
>>
>> Can anyone provide insight as to what this error means?
>>
>> ~A
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset

[Andrew T.]

Yes, I'm missing content for sure, but I've been able to parse incomplete
osis before which was missing content (it's never seemed to mind before).
(I've also been able to parse osis where the verses|chapters|books are out
of order - which is not true in this case).

I saw this thread which also seem to produce the error:
http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/2010-October/034968.html


I've looked through the source code to see if I can figure out what
conditions call the error.  zverse.cpp has something:
https://crosswire.org/svn/sword/trunk/src/modules/common/zverse.cpp
https://crosswire.org/~ghellings/svnclassdocs/classzVerse.html

zverse indicates it's purpose is to:

zVerse::zreadtext   - gets text at a given offset


so, its not clear (to me) what the error is saying exactly.  I will try to
confirm the OSIS/XML has not mismatched tags, but lack ideas beyond that ...
Thanks for considering the question.

~A


On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:24 PM, DM Smith  wrote:

> I’ve seen the error before. I’ve even tried to debug osis2mod to find it.
> To no avail. I never saw that they hindered the proper operation of
> osis2mod.
>
> Were you saying that the built module is missing expected content?
>
> DM
>
> > On Feb 17, 2018, at 11:14 PM, Andrew T.  wrote:
> >
> > I'm currently using the command:
> > /usr/bin/osis2mod . /sword/dss/DSS.osis.xml -z -b 4 -v KJVA
> >
> > Yet all I'm getting are the following errors:
> > Error reading ulCompOffset
> > Error reading ulCompOffset
> > Error reading ulCompOffset
> > ...
> >
> > I've created sword modules before, yet I don't recognize this error.
> >
> > I created the osis.xml file, and I'm fairly confident it is structured
> correctly - yet there are fragments missing (as the source of the text I
> used to create this document is fragmentary and incomplete).  For example
> there is no New Testament, no Esther, no Nehemiah ...)
> >
> > Can anyone provide insight as to what this error means?
> >
> > ~A
> > ___
> > 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
>
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
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

Re: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset

[Andrew T.]

Peter, I asked a question about an error message.  Your response deflected
to me.  Is this your way of illustrating Matt 18:22?
Do you know what the error message means or no?

~A


On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:50 AM, ref...@gmx.net  wrote:

> Has anything changed in your attitude since we saw you last time here?
>
> Peter
>
> Sent from my mobile. Please forgive shortness, typos and weird
> autocorrects.
>
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: [sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset
> From: "Andrew T."
> To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
> CC:
>
>
> I'm currently using the command:
> /usr/bin/osis2mod . /sword/dss/DSS.osis.xml -z -b 4 -v KJVA
>
> Yet all I'm getting are the following errors:
> Error reading ulCompOffset
> Error reading ulCompOffset
> Error reading ulCompOffset
> ...
>
> I've created sword modules before, yet I don't recognize this error.
>
> I created the osis.xml file, and I'm fairly confident it is structured
> correctly - yet there are fragments missing (as the source of the text I
> used to create this document is fragmentary and incomplete).  For example
> there is no New Testament, no Esther, no Nehemiah ...)
>
> Can anyone provide insight as to what this error means?
>
> ~A
>
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
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

[sword-devel] Error reading ulCompOffset

[Andrew T.]

I'm currently using the command:
/usr/bin/osis2mod . /sword/dss/DSS.osis.xml -z -b 4 -v KJVA

Yet all I'm getting are the following errors:
Error reading ulCompOffset
Error reading ulCompOffset
Error reading ulCompOffset
...

I've created sword modules before, yet I don't recognize this error.

I created the osis.xml file, and I'm fairly confident it is structured
correctly - yet there are fragments missing (as the source of the text I
used to create this document is fragmentary and incomplete).  For example
there is no New Testament, no Esther, no Nehemiah ...)

Can anyone provide insight as to what this error means?

~A
___
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

[sword-devel] OSIS project, version and updates?

[Andrew T.]

I observe that the FILE osisCore.2.1.1.xsd references the namespace URL
'xmlns="http://www.bibletechnologies.net/2003/OSIS/namespace";' which seems
to NO longer exist.

Anyone know what's happening with the osisCore project and whether or not
any updates can be expected in the (near or otherwise far) future?

~A
___
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