Difference between revisions of "OSIS 211 CR"

Revision as of 14:06, 4 August 2011

OSIS 2.1.1 Change Requests

The Society of Biblical Literature conference in November 2011 provides a potential opportunity for a decision making meeting. Therefore anyone with an outstanding OSIS bug report or feature proposal for consideration for inclusion into an updated OSIS schema, please write a very concise change request here in this page, including motivating use case.

Bugs

osisGenRegex bug

Currently that regex looks like [1], but it should looks like [2]:

[1]     ((((\p{L}|\p{N}|_)+)(\.(\p{L}|\p{N}|_))*:)?([^:\s])+)
[2]     ((((\p{L}|\p{N}|_)+)(\.(\p{L}|\p{N}|_)+)*:)?([^:\s])+)
                        (missing + right here ^)

So our document with the following element isn't valid because the string "Strong" cannot be more than 1 character long in the current schema: <w morph="robinson:N-NSF" lemma="lemma.Strong:βίβλος">βίβλος</w> --Osk 19:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Feature requests

Allow <transChange> within <w>

An encoder ought to be allowed to put <transChange> on elements smaller than an orthographic word. If I'm translating an instance of "λόγος", but for some reason I believe that I should translate it as "words", I ought to be able to encode <w>word<transChange>s</transChange></w>. --Osk 19:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Add an element for morphology within <w>

Necessary for encoding documents like MORPH (WLC + morphology), we need an element to embed within <w> to carry lexical information. I suggest calling it <m> and giving it all of the attributes found on <w>. --Osk 19:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Allow <transChange> within <hi>

A highlighted sentence or part of a sentence is a unit, including any transChange parts of it. At the moment a highlighted sentence with a transChange will look like this: <hi type="bold"> Texttexttext </hi><transChange><hi type="bold"> moreText</hi></transChange><hi type="bold"> TextText</hi> <hi type="bold"> Texttexttext <transChange>moreText</transChange> TextText</hi>

This would look cleaner and would be also closer to what is meant. refdoc:talk 16:02, 3 August 2011 (MDT)