Re: Lack of momentum for OSIS.
OSIS as described on wikipedia is owned by a committee including
United Bible Societies, SIL International, and the Society of
Biblical Literature.
However, this team got together and created the version that is
available, then almost completely ignored it, and went back to the
SFM tagging system and then produced USFM, when turned into several
more closely related XML languages, but has become USX. There was in
the UBS/SIL Paratext translation program the ability to produce OSIS
output until version 8, but since about 2016, there is no use or
mention of OSIS in Paratext.
A history and analysis of why this is published in Balisage 2021
conference:
https://www.balisage.net/Proceedings/vol26/html/Robie01/BalisageVol26-Robie01.html
Even in 2024, the tagging language USFM remains the "primary" tool to
encode biblical works at almost all the organizations that produced
OSIS. There is no momentum for that committee to ever meet again. But
the spec has holes.
https://gitlab.com/cmahte/osis-users-manual-2.1
I started working on updating OSIS, and in the process received a
reply from someone at ABS or UBS that although the OSIS spec is
copyrighted and does not contain specific verbiage about reuse, I
could and should consider it licensed under creative commons BY-SA.
(At the time, I wasn't seeking to update OSIS, but freely copy from
it in creating a successor or fork.)
This means that OSIS is both abandoned and available for adoption by
a successor body. I've also since moved on from ever producing
proposed changes to it or a fork myself. IF I ever got far enough
along to need a formal spec, it would be extensions USFM or to
OpenDocument or more directly synonymous with that XML. If you're
interested, I'll dig up the contact information, and pass it along.
But I do have a copy re-edited into USFM (or more specifically a
draft version of PSFM... which means the way tables are built in my
text are unusual.) If there is an effort to update. I can transform
my work into LibreOffice Writer format.
I suggest it is time to consider an OSIS 3, or at least an OSIS 2.2
spec that is owned by a successor organization instead of
organizations that effectively abandoned it. That's the missing link
which would provide a mechanism to actually make changes to the
standard. People (including me) keep doing this search and landing
at Crosswire Bible society as the best option for a new owner. But
maybe who OWNS can be one of the topics considered by a committee.
On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 9:47 AM Arnaud Vié <unas.zole+a...@gmail.com
<mailto:unas.zole%2ba...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi everyone,
Having dived into the whole crosswire ecosystem recently, I'm at
the same time impressed at the quality of the tools provided (in
particular the OSIS standard and the JSword lib, as I've been
working in Java), and worried by what I perceive as a lack of
dynamism around it's development and difficulty to contribute.
By "lack of dynamism" I of course don't mean to criticise the
time anyone spends (as we contribute to a free ecosystem, we all
have lives keeping us busy elsewhere), but rather to highlight
how rough it is for external enthusiastic people to join.
For example, I'd like to contribute evolutions to the OSIS
standard around versification systems, but I have no idea where
to make such proposals, as there is only a mailing list dead
since 2015 <http://crosswire.org/pipermail/osis-core/>, a few
wiki pages <https://wiki.crosswire.org/Category:OSIS> and a few
downloadable documents <https://crosswire.org/osis/> which are
supposedly the latest version.
I think a lot of that could be improved by making better use of
the crosswire github project <https://github.com/crosswire>,
which is nowadays the first contact most young developers will
have with these crosswire projects.
I'd like to propose a few changes, get your opinions, and
volunteer to execute them if everyone agrees.
* *Revive the jsword github repository*.
That includes
o Backporting the relevant changes from the andbible fork
<https://github.com/AndBible/jsword/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed>
(excluding android-specific stuff - which I already
mostly removed in my last PR there).
o Setting up a release process to publish the jar on a
maven repository.
o Setting up a clear branching model and writing clear
contribution guidelines.
o Having a team of several people familiar with Java
development to review PRs or answer questions in the
issue tracker. I obviously volunteer, but more people is
always the best.
* *Create a new Git repository for the OSIS specification*.
Must contain :
o In Git, the OSIS XSD schema, and the functional
specification (basically, the contents of the current
manual) in markdown or asciidoc format.
So that contributions to the standard may be opened as
pull requests, reviewed, potentially stored as separate
branches, etc.
o A wiki tab where all relevant OSIS-related resources from
the crosswire wiki should be copied.
* Ideally, I'd also suggest *moving the C++ sword code to github*.
Having it only on an old SVN repo
<https://crosswire.org/svn/sword/trunk/>, not browsable or
searchable online, really harms its visibility. I used a
little bit of SVN while in engineering school 12 years ago,
but I doubt that most young devs nowadays even know about it.
But for this last C++ part, I suspect it has bigger impact on
current developers, since Troy is still actively developing it
and using the Jira bugtracker for this part - so there is no
urgent need to change.
I'm really more worried about the jsword repo (it breaks my heart
to see it dead since 2019) and having a visible and versioned
location for the OSIS standard.
Please let me know your thoughts !
And whoever is currently admin of the github project, would you
be willing to grant me some permissions on the jsword repo and a
new "osis-spec" repo to start setting up all of this ?
Regards,
Arnaud Vié