On Thu, 22 Aug 2013, Chris Burrell wrote:
For our lexicon, we don't use SWORD modules because they aren't flexible
enough. The main drawback was the lack of segregation of different parts of
data.
I'm assuming that by "Segregation", you mean that they didn't have a
wide enough variety of fields in which data could be encoded?
I'm not an expert but I didn't think the current OSIS would let you do what
I attached in the previous files, such that you could retrieve them
separately. We also wanted control of how the indexing would happen.
Yes, I suspect you're right.
On the other hand, STEP's datasets are all based off Lucene, so there's no
reason why a new 'flexible' Sword module format couldn't be created.
I guess that's what I'd like :). In theory, OSIS allows multiple
indices; AFAICT SWORD doesn't support this.
:)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Name: Tim Nelson | Because the Creator is, |
| E-mail: wayl...@wayland.id.au | I am |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----
Version 3.12
GCS d+++ s+: a- C++$ U+++$ P+++$ L+++ E- W+ N+ w--- V-
PE(+) Y+>++ PGP->+++ R(+) !tv b++ DI++++ D G+ e++>++++ h! y-
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
_______________________________________________
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
