Hi Chris,
I'm certainly no expert on your TEI dictionaries, but wouldn't it make
sense to have the first key be one that would sort properly, and present
the dictionary in true alphabetical order? I'm thinking of Middle
Liddell, as well as the Hebrew. This key wouldn't even necessarily have
to be shown to the user. The second key, the title, could then maintain
the proper accents for display, without hindering sorting, searching or
navigation.
Peace,
David
On 4/29/2012 6:28 PM, Chris Little wrote:
I would say Daniel's markup is great and need not be changed in any
way. The TEI filters are certainly still at a work-in-progress stage
and definitely need more work--now being a great time to do it
inasmuch as 1.7 is around the corner.
Working from memory, so I'm a little uncertain of the details: The
first 'key' is the value of entryFree's n attribute (which could be a
pipe-separated list of synonyms--values that have independent link
entries that point to a single instance of the full entry). The Strong
module in Beta shows how these pipe-separated synonyms appear when
they are present, and it's not particularly pretty since no one has
attempted to pretty them up.
The second 'key' is actually the entry title, from the title element's
CDATA. It represents the author's (or module author's) idea of what
the title should be, if any. This title should definitely be left as
it is.
The fact that there is no space at all between the presentation of the
key and of the title is certainly bad. There should at least be a new
paragraph before the title text. The n attribute on entry(Free) is
largely there to signal to the importers what the entry keys are. I
would be amendable to removing it if there is consensus that it should
go. I think I'd prefer to retain it, but signal that it is not really
part of the entry text. One idea that comes to mind is
right-justifying it, placing it in brackets, and moving it to the end
of the entry. So the cited example would look something like:
H4899 {hebrew text} /anointed/
[H4899]
and a more complicated example, from Strong, would become:
G3778 οὗτος οὗτοι αὕτη αὕται houtos houtoi hautē hautai hoo'-tos
hoo'-toy how'-tay how'-tahee
Including the nominative masculine plural (second form) nominative
feminine signular (third form) and the nominate feminine plural
(fourth form). From the article G3588 and G846; the he (she or it)
that is this or that (often with the article repeated): - he (it was
that) hereof it she such as the same these they this (man same woman)
which who.
[G3778|οὗτος οὗτοι αὕτη αὕται]
I would also be amenable to changing the pipe to something else, like
a comma or semi-colon.
Thoughts?
--Chris
On 04/28/2012 08:38 AM, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
I just installed BDBGlosses_Strongs, and I find the formatting choice
very odd. Is this inherent to TEI, is it a poor filter implementation,
or is this a poor choice for how to encode?
We hardly need the element key repeated twice, once bold and once
regular, in each element. What's the point of this?
Entry source:
$$$H4899
<entryFree n="H4899"><title>H4899</title> <foreign
xml:lang="he">מָשִׁיחַ</foreign> <hi rend="italic">anointed</hi></entryFree>
_______________________________________________
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
