On 04/13/2013 03:06 PM, Chris Little wrote:
On 4/12/2013 9:42 PM, John Austin wrote:
I still can't see the argument for requiring that everyone call these
questionable instances paragraphs, and require that they must always be
marked up as such. Why not give the publisher the option of calling it a
paragraph if they consider it a paragraph, or else calling it an indent
if they think it will be more correctly understood as an indent? For
instance, many people consider that a paragraph should be followed by a
blank line (between paragraphs). What if I desire that this indented
line in my translation should never have a blank line after it, and that
it is an actual indent which is the content I intend to add- in order to
make my text more understandable? Then I should be able to call it an
indent. I would be very correct in doing so. Future readers of my OSIS
file would also unambiguously understand my intentions as well.
The USFM from the publisher encodes them as paragraphs, so apparently
the publisher believes they're paragraphs.
No, the publisher does not believe they are paragraphs. You can talk to
the translator herself (or himself) and they will have no clue about the
markup.
They appear and are treated in every sense as if they are paragraphs.
You can continue to invent hypothetical circumstances in which you
differentiate these from other paragraphs, but that continues to simply
underline the fact that they are a different _type_ of paragraph.
Any type of paragraph is still a type of paragraph. Any paragraph could
someday become subject to somebody's "paragraph" rules. I'm arguing that
Sword should offer something that will always be a basic milestone
indent, and can never be subject to anybody else's interpretation of
what a paragraph is. The most obvious way to do this would be to call it
an indent, and not a paragraph.
If you want to call them indents, I suppose you can. If you want to call
them unicorns, you could do that as well. But for the purposes of
encoding, you need to use one of the available structures and not
continue trying to muck up our code with hacks to handle bad and
unreasoned encoding practice.
Markup for poetry, including line indentation levels, has been part of
OSIS since 1.0. So the fact that you initially recommended using your
indentation milestones to layout poetry further demonstrates that you're
interested in generating presentational side effects and don't
particularly care about the complications and poor encoding practice
introduced by doing so or about maintaining the integrity of the source
document's encoding.
I do care very much about the integrity of the source document. I just
believe that some documents have more integrity using OSIS milestone
indents than if they had to exclusively use any type of paragraph.
--Chris
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: [email protected]
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: [email protected]
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
