I saw that Scope was yanked from the wiki with a comment that it had been
rejected. I really don't remember it being rejected. I just remember that the
discussion never went anywhere so it was dropped. I documented the desire of
that discussion by putting an entry into the wiki. Even if engine support is
given for determining this by examining a module, it will be far slower than
having a declaration in the conf. On phones (low powered devices), such
discovery is much too expensive and needs to be cached on a per module basis so
that it is not recomputed.
I still think that it is very needed. I'm getting tired of how such discussions
go.
I'm not at all clear why NoParagraphs was added as a Feature for the frontends
to use. I don't remember any discussion of it here. I don't see the need for
it. A frontend can examine each and every verse to see if there is paragraphing
or other such structural elements that imply paragraphing. I have no intention
of using it for the KJV. At least not without community discussion and buy-in.
How is NoParagraphs any different than NoIntroductions (or Introductions) !!!!!
In Him,
DM Smith
On Jun 2, 2013, at 5:47 PM, Chris Little <chris...@crosswire.org> wrote:
> On 6/2/2013 9:23 AM, Chris Burrell wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Some books have Bible introductions. Can I suggest adding a flag to the
>> conf file to indicate this is the case? In the similar mindset as a
>> previous post, I'd prefer being able to query the conf file for features
>> of a particular module rather than having to read part of the module and
>> hope for that particular book/chapter to have an introduction. A yes/no
>> flag in the .conf file would be helpful.
>>
>> (In particular, I have in mind the book introductions that are part of
>> the ESV text). But no doubt other modules will also (or in the future
>> will also) have the same aspects.
>>
>> Chris
>
> I would say no. This doesn't add anything.
>
> Identifying that a module possesses introductions at some level does not
> indicate that it possesses all of the introductions at that level.
> Accordingly, knowing that a module possesses introductions still requires
> checking for non-empty contents in order to know that a particular
> introduction is non-empty.
>
> This is along the lines of the request for a Scope .conf entry, which was
> already rejected. Whatever solution is used for that case can also be used
> for introductions.
>
> --Chris
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
