Closed funderburkjim closed 2 years ago
In the first comment, I forgot to say that there is also exactly 1 F for each D. That comment now edited.
Emacs search for <\(V\|F4\).*<\(V\|F4\)
in checkgroup.txt finds 190 matches.
For instance
<S>,<D11>,<F>11),<F4.2>,<F4.1>
(F4.1, F4.2 misordered)<HS>,<S>,<D90>,<F>90),<F4.2>,<V3>90.
(V3, F4.2 misordered)<S>,<D160>,<F>160),<V2>160. ,<V3>160. ,<F4.1>
ordering correctSo 190 looks to be the number of Spruch to examine in the digitization.
Current formatting
An entry consists of
- 0 or more
<HS>
groups (Spruch cross references)- exactly 1
<S>
group1 or more
<D>
groups (usually 1, but 2 or more in 159 cases)
- There are always the same number of D groups as Spruch, but the multiple spruch are written under 1 S group.
- for each D group, exactly 1 ~S-group~ F-group,
- 0 or 1 of
<V1>, <V2>, <V3>, <F4.1>, <F4.2>
Suggestion
In textual order, the V1, V2, V3, F4.1 and F4.2 sections should appear in that order. However, the current digitization does not have this ordering. For instance
<S>,<D278>,<F>278),<V3>278. ,<V1>278.
<S>,<D349>,<F>349),<F4.2>,<V3>349.
The suggestion is to move the V and F items so the textual order is preserved.
@thomasincambodia Do you agree? If so, I'll do that
of course, go ahead
This reordering work done. See this diff.
Current formatting
An entry consists of
<HS>
groups (Spruch cross references)<S>
group<D>
groups (usually 1, but 2 or more in 159 cases)<V1>, <V2>, <V3>, <F4.1>, <F4.2>
Suggestion
In textual order, the V1, V2, V3, F4.1 and F4.2 sections should appear in that order. However, the current digitization does not have this ordering. For instance
<S>,<D278>,<F>278),<V3>278. ,<V1>278.
<S>,<D349>,<F>349),<F4.2>,<V3>349.
The suggestion is to move the V and F items so the textual order is preserved.
@thomasincambodia Do you agree? If so, I'll do that