On 2016-05-21, 19:49 GMT, Greg Hellings wrote:
> Does Xiphos support av11n? I didn't think it does.
The same happens with diatheke:
~$ diatheke -b CzeCEP -k Isa 40:1
Isaiah 40:1: Zpívejte Hospodinu píseň novou! Ať zní jeho chvála
ze všech končin země. Ti, kteří se vydávají na moře,
Oh, right, I was brain farting back to 3.x. Oops!
--Greg
On May 21, 2016 2:52 PM, "Karl Kleinpaste" wrote:
> On 05/21/2016 03:49 PM, Greg Hellings wrote:
>
> Does Xiphos support av11n? I didn't think it does.
>
> Certainly. It was the major effort for the beginning of v4.
>
> ___
On 05/21/2016 03:49 PM, Greg Hellings wrote:
>
> Does Xiphos support av11n? I didn't think it does.
>
Certainly. It was the major effort for the beginning of v4.
___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/list
Does Xiphos support av11n? I didn't think it does.
--Greg
On May 21, 2016 2:47 PM, "Matěj Cepl" wrote:
> On 2016-03-10, 14:55 GMT, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> >> I’m trying to work out something for modules that are old,
> >> having no current maintainer, no prior maintainer available
> >> for consultat
On 2016-03-10, 14:55 GMT, Matěj Cepl wrote:
>> I’m trying to work out something for modules that are old,
>> having no current maintainer, no prior maintainer available
>> for consultation, no available source, no clear source that
>> was used, ... and have a very minor change needed.
>
> Well,
On 2016-03-10, 14:12 GMT, DM Smith wrote:
> If a module has linked verses (e.g. commentaries may have one
> entry that spans several verses) or verses outside of the
> versification, then there is no lossless return to module
> input.
I don’t think this is the case (can you take a look for
you
> On Mar 10, 2016, at 8:28 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
>
> On 2016-03-10, 10:45 GMT, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
>> By finding the source and starting from scratch
>
> There is no source, unless you have it. The module is from
> 2003-03-21.
>
> And we are talking here about s/y/i/ in one word.
>
> Wha
2016 um 13:57 Uhr
Von: "Karl Kleinpaste"
An: "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum"
Betreff: Re: [sword-devel] Help with CzeCEP update (av11n)
On 03/10/2016 02:58 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
On 2016-03-10, 04:52 GMT, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
A module created this way
> On Mar 10, 2016, at 8:57 AM, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
>
> On 03/10/2016 02:58 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
>> On 2016-03-10, 04:52 GMT, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
>>> A module created this way would not be accepted for new import.
>> Sorry, which way? What’s wrong? Do you mean, because of using
>> mod2im
On 2016-03-10, 10:45 GMT, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> By finding the source and starting from scratch
There is no source, unless you have it. The module is from
2003-03-21.
And we are talking here about s/y/i/ in one word.
What is the best decompiler of mod files to see what all
functionality ou
On 03/10/2016 02:58 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> On 2016-03-10, 04:52 GMT, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
>> A module created this way would not be accepted for new import.
> Sorry, which way? What’s wrong? Do you mean, because of using mod2imp?
> I will gladly use any better sources I will be pointed to, or c
By finding the source and starting from scratch
On 10 March 2016 10:29:03 GMT+00:00, "Matěj Cepl" wrote:
>On 2016-03-10, 09:31 GMT, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
>> Specifically versification is lossy as you now notice.
>
>So, how is that bug supposed to be fixed?
>
>Matěj
>
>--
>https://matej.ceplovi
On 2016-03-10, 09:31 GMT, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> Specifically versification is lossy as you now notice.
So, how is that bug supposed to be fixed?
Matěj
--
https://matej.ceplovi.cz/blog/, Jabber: mc...@ceplovi.cz
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
One reason that
On 2016-03-10, 08:54 GMT, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> We would never export and reimport. Yes
> We only ever work one way, because import is lossy.
Lovely, so where it the maintainer I should send my (one word)
correction to? I know you hate the open source development of
modules, but this is real
Specifically versification is lossy as you now notice.
Sent from my phone. Apologies for brevity and typos.On 10 Mar 2016 8:54 am,
Peter von Kaehne wrote:
>
> We would never export and reimport. Yes
> We only ever work one way, because import is lossy.
>
> Sent from my phone. Apologies for brevi
We would never export and reimport. Yes
We only ever work one way, because import is lossy.
Sent from my phone. Apologies for brevity and typos.On 10 Mar 2016 7:58 am,
Matěj Cepl wrote:
>
> On 2016-03-10, 04:52 GMT, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> > A module created this way would not be accepted for
On 2016-03-10, 04:52 GMT, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> A module created this way would not be accepted for new import.
Sorry, which way? What’s wrong? Do you mean, because of using
mod2imp? I will gladly use any better sources I will be pointed
to, or contact the module maintainer, but I am afraid
A module created this way would not be accepted for new import.
Peter
On 10 March 2016 01:43:45 GMT+00:00, "Matěj Cepl" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am trying to recreate a module generating pipeline for CzeCEP
>(source is from mod2imp on the existing source) so that I could
>fix an embarassing bug
>http
Hi,
I am trying to recreate a module generating pipeline for CzeCEP
(source is from mod2imp on the existing source) so that I could
fix an embarassing bug
http://crosswire.org/tracker/browse/MOD-307, but I have troubles
with v11n (again). Original CzeCEP was I suppose in KJV v11n,
but general
19 matches
Mail list logo