[www.theword.net]

Twitter live feed  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Mon Mar 08, 2021 11:28 am



Reply to topic  [ 70 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma, etc 
Author Message

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 am
Posts: 156
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
csterg wrote:
RubioTerra wrote:
Well, about the extra "Strong's" numbers: the evidence JG showed indeed seems to indicate that they represent tense/voice/mood. On the other hand, as Costas stated, why one anyone need to add those to a module that already have full morphology parsing? Additionally, they occur scarcely throughout the text, suggesting they may serve another purpose.


I do not think they serve any other purpose apart from indicating T/V/M.

These appear to have been included by Robinson for use with software that utilised dictionaries such as the Englishman Strong's Dictionary (which from memory, includes Strong's numbers for TVM definitions)(eg Online Bible). I haven't used this in years, but I do have a copy of the "BestLex" module someone converted for TW, that includes extra Strong's numbers for T/V/M.

In verbs that I have checked, the extra Strong's number given matches with the TVM defined in "BestLex" and these correlate precisely with the morphological tag in the Byz2005 module for verb parsing. So there are two ways given in Robinison's Byz2005 original txt file for TVM to be shown. I think this is just so it remains compatible with those dictionaries that use Strong's numbers for TVM within the same Strong's dictionary. As theWord relies on the RMAC module to define the morphological codes and Byz2005 includes full morph codes, there is no need for the extra Strong's number.


csterg wrote:
To Conclude: I think that if the TVM codes are removed, the new Byz2005 can go in the official channel. All agree?


I agree with removing TVM codes (the extra Strong's numbers).

csterg wrote:
2. Strong coding is not perfect (as with everything). This will continue to be like that. I don't have a proposal for fixing these recycled indexes,


In the example Robinson gives, G4055 does not occur in the TR anyway, which Strong's based his numbers on. So I wouldn't be concerned for this for now. The printed edition of Strong's dictionary lists "ekperissou" but gives no definition or number, it just says "see 1537 and 4053".

Paul.

_________________
PaulC

Check out YouTube for theWord Bible Software Tutorial Series 1
A series of introductory video tutorials for theWord Bible Software


Mon Dec 19, 2011 2:28 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 am
Posts: 156
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Hi Rubio,

Can you please explain what is happenning with the display of Byzantine variants?

Line 129 (Matt 5:39) has this code:

Code:
<pref>「<wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός">」</pref><RF><b>Byzantine variant:</b><CL><font color=blue>σιαγόνα</font> | <font color=red>σου σιαγόνα</font><Rf><var><font color=red>「<wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός">」 — <wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός"> <wt>σου<WG4771><WTP-2GS l="σύ"></font></var>


It seems as though everything from the <pref> to the </pref> tag and the <RF> to the <Rf> tag does not display in TW (including when "footnotes" are turned on).

Further, it seems as though this is indicating the Byzantine variant reading in three different ways. But only one displays - text that occurs between <var> and </var>.

I note this is the case in other places that show Byzantine variants.

The footnote tag in the same line (129) for the NA27/UBS variants works when "footnotes" is displayed.

Code:
<RF><b>NA27/UBS4 variant:</b><CL><font color=blue>στρέψον</font> | <font color=red>[σου] στρέψον</font><Rf>


Just wondering why this doesn't work for the Byzantine variants that are tagged with <RF>?

Blessings
Paul.

EDITED Mon Dec 19, 2011 7:17 pm (UTC +10 hrs): Do not worry. I just realised that I needed to press the "V" key to turn off and on the Byzantine variants. ALL IS WELL :-)

_________________
PaulC

Check out YouTube for theWord Bible Software Tutorial Series 1
A series of introductory video tutorials for theWord Bible Software


Last edited by engellion on Mon Dec 19, 2011 11:19 am, edited 1 time in total.



Mon Dec 19, 2011 4:17 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:17 pm
Posts: 266
Location: Maine.usa
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Code:
<pref>「<wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός">」</pref><RF><b>Byzantine variant:</b><CL><font color=blue>σιαγόνα</font> | <font color=red>σου σιαγόνα</font><Rf><var><font color=red>「<wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός">」 — <wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός"> <wt>σου<WG4771><WTP-2GS l="σύ"></font></var>


1. Correct me if I'm wrong, but <CL> and <font color=xxxx> tags are invalid inside <RF> tags (at least I've never seen them used that way)
2. Without a verse rule, anything inside the <pref> and <var> will be hidden in tw as they are not valid Bible Mod tags
3. So I'm seeing three parts:

<pref>「<wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός">」</pref>
<RF><b>Byzantine variant:</b><CL><font color=blue>σιαγόνα</font> | <font color=red>σου σιαγόνα</font><Rf>
<var><font color=red>「<wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός">」 — <wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός"> <wt>σου<WG4771><WTP-2GS l="σύ"></font></var>

I think the footnote will work if you take out the <CL> and <font> tags. (the pipe | doesn't help either, except visually)
The rest should work if you either take out the <pref> and <var> tags or make a verse rule to utilize them.

To test, try this:
Code:
「<wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός">」<RF><b>Byzantine variant:</b> σιαγόνα | σου σιαγόνα<Rf>「<wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός">」 — <wt>δεξιὰν<WG1188><WTA-ASF l="δεξιός"> <wt>σου<WG4771><WTP-2GS l="σύ">


I don't remember, but I think <b> tags work inside <RF> tags OK.

So: you could make a verse rule to toggle between 2 or 3 states, or make 2 or 3 footnotes, or just show everything at once.

I'm just throwing it out there, food for thought, for better or worse....


Mon Dec 19, 2011 4:22 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 am
Posts: 156
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
William wrote:

1. Correct me if I'm wrong, but <CL> and <font color=xxxx> tags are invalid inside <RF> tags (at least I've never seen them used that way)


In the same line (129) <CL> and <font color=xxxx> tags are used for the NA27/UBS4 variants and these display correctly as footnotes.

Code:
<RF><b>NA27/UBS4 variant:</b><CL><font color=blue>στρέψον</font> | <font color=red>[σου] στρέψον</font><Rf>


So why not with Byzantine variants with the same type of tags?

Quote:
The rest should work if you either take out the <pref> and <var> tags or make a verse rule to utilize them.


Rubio has created verse rules for <pref> and <var> tags:

Code:
verse.rule="<wt>([^<]+)(<W(G\d+)>)(<W(G\d+)>)?(<W(G\d+)>)?(<WT([^\ >]+) l=""([^""]+)"">)(<W(G\d+)>)?(<WT([^\ >]+) l=""([^""]+)"">)?" "<wt><a href=""_ORIGWORD_$1|_LEMMA_$10|_STRONG_$3|_STRONG2_$5|_STRONG3_$7|_STRONG4_$12|_MORPH_$9|_MORPH2_$14|_NOLINK_"">$1</a>$2$4$6$8$11$13"
verse.rule="<var>(.*?)</var>" "<ST toggle=v>$1<St>"
verse.rule="<pref>(.*?)</pref>" "<ST toggle=^v>$1<St>"
verse.rule="(<RF><b>B.*?<Rf>)" "<ST toggle=^v>$1<St>"


So maybe there is something amiss here with these rules?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

EDITED Mon Dec 19, 2011 7:19 pm (UTC +10 hrs): Do not worry. I just realised that I needed to press the "V" key to turn off and on the Byzantine variants. ALL IS WELL :)

_________________
PaulC

Check out YouTube for theWord Bible Software Tutorial Series 1
A series of introductory video tutorials for theWord Bible Software


Last edited by engellion on Mon Dec 19, 2011 11:21 am, edited 1 time in total.



Mon Dec 19, 2011 5:28 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:17 pm
Posts: 266
Location: Maine.usa
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Well, you got me... I dunno.

You say the <CL> and <font> tags work in a footnote?
Line break and color?
If I'd known that I'd have put them to work a long time ago.

This is from the tech.doc
Quote:
<RF [q=<quote>]>…<Rf>: footnotes: they can appear anywhere in a verse. No formatting tags for text of footnotes.
The q attribute is optional and can be used to denote the quote character (instead of the default numbering)

As to the verse rules, I don't have the source material so I'm just guessing as I can't test it.
The rules look OK at first glance.
Comment them out, and add back in 1x1 until you find the fault.


Mon Dec 19, 2011 5:51 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 am
Posts: 156
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
William wrote:
You say the <CL> and <font> tags work in a footnote?
Line break and color?
If I'd known that I'd have put them to work a long time ago.


This code : <RF><b>NA27/UBS4 variant:</b><CL><font color=blue>στρέψον</font> | <font color=red>[σου] στρέψον</font><Rf>

with this verse rule: verse.rule="(<RF><b>B.*?<Rf>)" "<ST toggle=^v>$1<St>"

in Rubio's Byz2005 module shows this footnote popup:

Attachment:
Byz2005_Byz_Variants_1.jpg
Byz2005_Byz_Variants_1.jpg [ 67.5 KiB | Viewed 4313 times ]


Quote:
As to the verse rules, I don't have the source material so I'm just guessing as I can't test it.


Its Rubio's module he linked to in the very first post of this thread.

I don't really understand how the verse rules should work for a module (is there a manual somewhere?), so I hope someone whoi does can identify what might be the issue.

Thanks, William.

Blessings.
Paul.

_________________
PaulC

Check out YouTube for theWord Bible Software Tutorial Series 1
A series of introductory video tutorials for theWord Bible Software


Mon Dec 19, 2011 6:46 am
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 8609
Location: Corfu, Greece
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Oops, i should upgrade the bible modules spec.
Simple tags (e.g. formatting tags) do work within RF tags. I did that a long time ago, but I probably didn't update the doc.
Costas


Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:59 am
Profile WWW

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 am
Posts: 156
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
JG wrote:
What is the purpose of the <WG0> tags?


OK, Since I posted a response to this earlier today, I now think I know what is going on. Robinson's notes from the original PDF document state this:

Quote:
"In some cases, Koine Greek words exist within the text of various editions that had not
appeared in the Textus Receptus upon which Strong's numbering system had been
based. In such cases, the new word is prefixed by an at-sign (@) entry, and located either
under a reasonably appropriate Strong's number, or assigned to a Strong's number that
otherwise would no longer exist due to root-based consolidation. One case in particular
is that of "ekperissou" and "ekperissw=", neither of which exist separately in the TR: these
have been assigned the Strong's numbers 4053 and 4057, thus retaining a common root
in close relation to other words containing some form of "periss-".

"The revision of the Strong's numbers within the Greek NT text is an ongoing process.
Ultimately all Strong's numbers in the Greek text will agree with the Greek lexical root
form."


<WG0> in the electronic text, corresponds to the @ symbol in the PDF document for all "new" words, that is words which are not found in the TR, and which Robinson has then located under a reasonably appropriate Strong's number or assigned to a freed up Strong's number due to consolidating some words under a common root.

Here's a link to the original PDF. You can check all the "new" words by searching for those with the @ symbol beside them. You'll see they match those words with the <WG0> tag in the Byz2005 module. What is good too, is that you can now easily see what Strong's numbers have been assigned them (thus making it a little easier for someone to verify changes to Strong's numbered definitions. I guess (hope) Mickelson's will eventually be updated to match Robinson's changes. I've counted 123 "new" words in the PDF document). http://koti.24.fi/jusalak/GreekNT/P-GK-ALL.PDF

So, <WG0> is not a mistake within the electronic text itself. While there is no need to mark it up as a Strong's definition, leaving it as is, however, does no harm. Perhap's a note should be included in the beginning of the module to explain what "G0" means based on Robinson's notes as given above.

Blessings
Paul.

_________________
PaulC

Check out YouTube for theWord Bible Software Tutorial Series 1
A series of introductory video tutorials for theWord Bible Software


Mon Dec 19, 2011 2:35 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:17 pm
Posts: 266
Location: Maine.usa
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
@Paul (and everyone else)

Thank you so much on opening my eyes to the <RF> formatting tags;
had I only known.... :roll:


[probably better I didn't or there would be a lot of multi-colored Bible mods]


Mon Dec 19, 2011 3:23 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:34 pm
Posts: 4144
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
engellion wrote:
JG wrote:
What is the purpose of the <WG0> tags?


OK, Since I posted a response to this earlier today, I now think I know what is going on. Robinson's notes from the original PDF document state this:

Quote:
"In some cases, Koine Greek words exist within the text of various editions that had not
appeared in the Textus Receptus upon which Strong's numbering system had been
based. In such cases, the new word is prefixed by an at-sign (@) entry, and located either
under a reasonably appropriate Strong's number, or assigned to a Strong's number that
otherwise would no longer exist due to root-based consolidation. One case in particular
is that of "ekperissou" and "ekperissw=", neither of which exist separately in the TR: these
have been assigned the Strong's numbers 4053 and 4057, thus retaining a common root
in close relation to other words containing some form of "periss-".

"The revision of the Strong's numbers within the Greek NT text is an ongoing process.
Ultimately all Strong's numbers in the Greek text will agree with the Greek lexical root
form."


<WG0> in the electronic text, corresponds to the @ symbol in the PDF document for all "new" words, that is words which are not found in the TR, and which Robinson has then located under a reasonably appropriate Strong's number or assigned to a freed up Strong's number due to consolidating some words under a common root.

Here's a link to the original PDF. You can check all the "new" words by searching for those with the @ symbol beside them. You'll see they match those words with the <WG0> tag in the Byz2005 module. What is good too, is that you can now easily see what Strong's numbers have been assigned them (thus making it a little easier for someone to verify changes to Strong's numbered definitions. I guess (hope) Mickelson's will eventually be updated to match Robinson's changes. I've counted 123 "new" words in the PDF document). http://koti.24.fi/jusalak/GreekNT/P-GK-ALL.PDF

So, <WG0> is not a mistake within the electronic text itself. While there is no need to mark it up as a Strong's definition, leaving it as is, however, does no harm. Perhap's a note should be included in the beginning of the module to explain what "G0" means based on Robinson's notes as given above.

Blessings
Paul.


Hi Paul, just some more info on the <WG0> tag. It is noted that the information has/had been formatted for use with the Online Bible, so in that software if you hover the 0 tag it says this

The original word in the Greek or Hebrew is translated by more than one word in the English. The English translation is separated by one or more other words from the original.

e.g. #Mt 15:23
Strong’s No. 630 English
to send away send 630 0 her 846 away 630

Here the verb "send away" is split by the word "her". The zero means the verb only occurs once in this passage not twice. Sometimes five or six words separate a word.

Some exceptions are in #Jer 51:3 where the zero in "bendeth 1869 0 let the archer 1869 8802 bend 1869 8799" connects "bendeth" with "bend" not "archer". See also #Nu 16:13, 22:17, 2Sa 12:14.


So the <WG0> does not correspond to the @ symbol. Do you agree?

_________________
Jon
the
Word 5 Bible Software
OS for testing; Windows 10
Beta Download ------Beta Setup Guide------On-line Manual------Tech doc's and Utilities------Copyright Factsheet


Mon Dec 19, 2011 4:40 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 am
Posts: 156
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
JG wrote:
So the <WG0> does not correspond to the @ symbol. Do you agree?


Hi John. No, I don't agree for the following reasons.

The Online Bible's explanation for the "zero" tag would be correct if you are looking at the KJV module within the Online Bible. But we are looking at the Byz2005 original language module as prepared by Robinson (with "zero" tags in it).

Look at the example verse given by the Online Bible's explanation for "zero" tags -- Matt 15:23. In the KJV it has the "zero" tag and the explanation makes sense. But in the Byz2005 module, there is no "zero" tag in this verse.

Now look at Acts 10:19

In the Online Bible KJV module there is no "zero" tag in this verse. But the Byz2005 has the "zero" tag. Why? Here's what I think.

The first part of the verse in the TR reads as follows:

"του G3588 δε G1161 πετρου G4074 ενθυμουμενου G1760 περι G4012 του G3588 οραματος G3705"

The same passage reads in the Byz2005 as follows:

"Τοῦ G3588 δὲ G1161 Πέτρου G4074 διενθυμουμένου G0 G1760 G5740 περὶ G4012 τοῦ G3588 ὁράματος G3705"

Apart from the "zero" and TVM tag, the only difference is the one word "ενθυμουμενου" in the TR for "διενθυμουμένου" in the Byz2005 txt.

"ενθυμουμενου" is translated in the KJV directly with only one word - "thought" - hence there is no need for a "zero" tag in the Online Bible's KJV module.

However, "διενθυμουμένου" does not occur in the Strong's dictionary, and therefore it is classed as a "new" word by Robinson and is marked with the "zero" tag in the Byz2005 txt, and given a reasonably appropriate Strong's number (in this case G1760).

The same thing is happenning act Luke 13:8 with the phrase: βαλω G906 κοπριαν G2874 (TR)

The Byz2005 txt reads this as: βάλω G906 G5632 κόπρια G0 G2874 (Byz05)

The only difference is "κόπρια" for "κοπριαν". Strong's has no number for "κοπρια", so Robinson marks this with the "zero" tag, and gives it a reasonably appropriate number.

Note, the KJV translated "βαλω κοπριαν" as ONE word -- "dung" (verb). [This is the exact OPPOSITE of what the Online Bible says the "zero" tag means. Hence, OLB shows no "zero" tag in the KJV module.]

For these reasons, I still think the @ symbol correlates with the <WG0> tag in the Byz2005 module.

I've noted 29 <WG0> tags, and 123 (manual count) @ symbols in the PDF document. However, I have tried running a search on some of those words marked with the @ symbol. I can't find any of them in the actual Byz2005 txt module except for the the words tagged with <WG0> within the module. (Perhaps they occur in other editions of the Greek txt, but I don't know). For this reason, I would leave the <WG0> tags in and I would include Robinson's explanation that he gave for the @ symbol use, only change it to show "G0" for the benefit of those using the module:

Quote:
"In some cases, Koine Greek words exist within the text of various editions that had not
appeared in the Textus Receptus upon which Strong's numbering system had been
based. In such cases, the new word is prefixed by an at-sign (@) entry, and located either
under a reasonably appropriate Strong's number, or assigned to a Strong's number that
otherwise would no longer exist due to root-based consolidation."


Your thoughts?

_________________
PaulC

Check out YouTube for theWord Bible Software Tutorial Series 1
A series of introductory video tutorials for theWord Bible Software


Tue Dec 20, 2011 4:58 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:34 pm
Posts: 4144
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Hi Paul,
I think you got it figured.
I contacted Online Bible to check and they have modified their dictionary module to display this note when hovering the <0>

The original word in the Greek or Hebrew is translated by more than one word in the English. The English translation is separated by one or more other words from the original.

e.g. #Mt 15:23
Strong’s No. 630 English
to send away send 630 0 her 846 away 630

Here the verb "send away" is split by the word "her". The zero means the verb only occurs once in this passage not twice. Sometimes five or six words separate a word.

Some exceptions are in #Jer 51:3 where the zero in "bendeth 1869 0 let the archer 1869 8802 bend 1869 8799" connects "bendeth" with "bend" not "archer". See also #Nu 16:13, 22:17, 2Sa 12:14.

In the Greek texts, BYZ, WH and Antoniades the Zero serves a different function. Words with a “0” prefixed separately are those that do not correspond to any actual Strong’s number, but which represent a quite different root word. The number given following the “0” is at best only the closest related word for comparison purposes.

_________________
Jon
the
Word 5 Bible Software
OS for testing; Windows 10
Beta Download ------Beta Setup Guide------On-line Manual------Tech doc's and Utilities------Copyright Factsheet


Thu Dec 22, 2011 3:25 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 4:13 pm
Posts: 714
Location: Brasília, Brazil
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Hello brethren!
After a long time, I revisited the Byz2005++ module. I stripped the TVM Strongs and created its own morphology dictionary, since Maurice Robinson uses a different coding system. By the way, the official morphology dictionary -- RMAC -- is from the same Robinson, Maurice A. Robinson? I didn't touch the <G0> tags, for they don't cause any problem, and someone could want to use them in the future.

I attached the updated module and the new morphology dictionary at the first post of this thread. Please take a look.

_________________
Rúbio R. C. Terra
Brasília/DF - Brasil


Wed May 16, 2012 2:01 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 am
Posts: 156
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
RubioTerra wrote:
Hello brethren!
After a long time, I revisited the Byz2005++ module. I stripped the TVM Strongs and created its own morphology dictionary, since Maurice Robinson uses a different coding system. By the way, the official morphology dictionary -- RMAC -- is from the same Robinson, Maurice A. Robinson? I didn't touch the <G0> tags, for they don't cause any problem, and someone could want to use them in the future.

I attached the updated module and the new morphology dictionary at the first post of this thread. Please take a look.


Hello Rubio!

I just downloaded your updated module. It looks great!

Two points.

1. Based on the note that Maurice Robinson included to explain the use of the @ symbol in his original printed text, I'd suggest adding the following under "About this electronic version", to explain the use of "G0" in your module:

Code:
"When showing Strong's Numbers in the Byzantine Text, words with a “G0” prefixed separately are those that stem from a Koine Greek word that exists within various Byzantine text editions but that had not appeared in the Textus Receptus upon which Strong's numbering system had been based. In those cases, the Strong's Number that immediately follows the “G0” was assigned by Maurice A. Robinson and is at best only the closest related word for comparison purposes."


2. Is there a particular reason to include the Byzantine variants in the main body of the text as well as in the footnotes? I understand that neither is able to be seen at the same time, but just wondering if there is any particular thought behind having the variants in appear both places.

Blessings,
Paul.

_________________
PaulC

Check out YouTube for theWord Bible Software Tutorial Series 1
A series of introductory video tutorials for theWord Bible Software


Fri May 25, 2012 4:20 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 4:13 pm
Posts: 714
Location: Brasília, Brazil
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
engellion wrote:
RubioTerra wrote:
Hello brethren!
After a long time, I revisited the Byz2005++ module. I stripped the TVM Strongs and created its own morphology dictionary, since Maurice Robinson uses a different coding system. By the way, the official morphology dictionary -- RMAC -- is from the same Robinson, Maurice A. Robinson? I didn't touch the <G0> tags, for they don't cause any problem, and someone could want to use them in the future.

I attached the updated module and the new morphology dictionary at the first post of this thread. Please take a look.


Hello Rubio!

I just downloaded your updated module. It looks great!

Two points.

1. Based on the note that Maurice Robinson included to explain the use of the @ symbol in his original printed text, I'd suggest adding the following under "About this electronic version", to explain the use of "G0" in your module:

Code:
"When showing Strong's Numbers in the Byzantine Text, words with a “G0” prefixed separately are those that stem from a Koine Greek word that exists within various Byzantine text editions but that had not appeared in the Textus Receptus upon which Strong's numbering system had been based. In those cases, the Strong's Number that immediately follows the “G0” was assigned by Maurice A. Robinson and is at best only the closest related word for comparison purposes."


2. Is there a particular reason to include the Byzantine variants in the main body of the text as well as in the footnotes? I understand that neither is able to be seen at the same time, but just wondering if there is any particular thought behind having the variants in appear both places.

Blessings,
Paul.

Hello, Paul!

Well, about the two points:

1. I use the "Show no links" configuration, that hide the Strong tags, so the <WG0> tags don't bother me. But you're right, I'll do that.
2. The idea is to show the Byzantine variants as notes by default and, if one would like to see them in detail, he can press V. That way, is possible to have an uncluttered view that offers quick access to variants (as notes), and a detailed view, which give access to Strongs and morphology info (and hide the notes, now unnecessary).

_________________
Rúbio R. C. Terra
Brasília/DF - Brasil


Fri May 25, 2012 8:11 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 70 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.
[ Time : 0.776s | 15 Queries | GZIP : Off ]