Hot-Links missing for some classes of word references

[destatez]

There appear to be 3 classes of instances where hot-links (XML tag-pairs) should be present for links to other words in the XML file:

1. The use of the character "<" for "derived from" should have the following word(s) hot-linked
2. The word(s) following the "SYN" keyword should be hot-linked
3. (This needs a confirmation from Todd) The use of the character "=" for "equal to" with following Greek, and not English, should have those following word(s) hot-linked

For each of these cases, only the referenced words that exist in this XML should be hot-linked, otherwise they should NOT BE modified to have the XML tag-pair.

This could be an automated task by an XML-smart tool to check for compliance, and to update with the tag-pair, where needed

[toddlprice]

Yes, I agree with all this including #3.

[destatez]

Chuck

Is this something you can pick up with your XML-smart tool/scripts or are you up to your eyeballs? I haven't seen/heard anything from Patrick for a while. Has he moved on to other things?

Dave

[cbearden]

Hi Dave,

I think this is doable, but like most complex changes of this sort it should probably be reviewed by a human editor. The first step I would take would be analysis: (a) can I identify the relevant cases with the Greek words to be linked; (b) for how many of the candidate links can I find targets within the document? (c) what is the best markup to specify the link?

Sorry I haven't had much time the past three or four days. If you haven't worked up the Appendix A, I think I have an approach that will get it mostly right to start with. I just haven't had time to implement yet.

I haven't heard from Patrick either. My only interaction with him has been the recent discussion in the Google Group.

All the best, Chuck

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 2:24 PM, David Statezni notifications@github.com wrote:

Chuck

Is this something you can pick up with your XML-smart tool/scripts or are you up to your eyeballs? I haven't seen/heard anything from Patrick for a while. Has he moved on to other things?

Dave

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-267434258, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAaEFlI7Esg-IRdCjWqKgDU1iwx9y43Zks5rIaH6gaJpZM4LCEpF .

[destatez]

Chuck

We could do a divide and conquer. I can search for the 3 cases listed in the Issue. I already have the "entries" in a hash, that I can update after the latest Pull Request, so I could generate a report for each instance that has an entry link in the doc and which needs to be updated. This will take some perl "re", but that's not that hard, I mess with "re" a lot. In terms of the update, I was thinking of following the current scheme which has the referenced "entry" surrounded by a tag-pair. See below for στρατοπέδαρχος (&lt; <ref><foreign xml:lang="grc">στρατόπεδον</foreign></ref>, <ref><foreign xml:lang="grc">ἄρχω</foreign></ref>)

Relative to the appendix(s), why don't you work up the schema that you talked about. I think that it is the right answer. Did you see my questions on that topic in the Google group discussion?

Dave

[destatez]

Todd

I have some questions on how to handle the SYN. references. Below are several examples, where I have questions about what ought to be and what ought not to be "referenced". The possible combinations are almost endless, so could you define some guidelines (rules) for what to tag and what not to tag?

For the first, ἀθέμιτος, should the v.s. be treated as "for example" with the subsequent grc word ἄθεσμος tagged with ...? Should the 2nd, ψυχή, be processed likewise for νοῦς, and also tag the 2nd, πνεῦμα, and 3rd, ψυχικός, grc words with ...? The 3rd through 5th have different forms of q.v. following the 1st instance. Should the 3rd, ἄδολος, have ἀκέραιος and its 2nd, ἄκακος, and 3rd, ἁπλοῦς, instances tagged? Should the 4th, ἁγνίζω, have καθαρίζω and the instance, ἁγνός, following the v.s. tagged? Should the 5th, ἀγρυπνέω, have γρηγορέω and the instance, νήφω, tagged? Should the 6th, ἀγάπη, have φιλία as well as the instance following the v.s., ἀγαπάω tagged? Should the 7th, ἀγαθός, have only καλός and δίκαιος tagged?

1) ἀθέμιτος <re><emph>SYN.</emph>: v.s. <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἄθεσμος</foreign>.</re>
2) ψυχή         <re><emph>SYN.</emph>: v.s. <foreign xml:lang="grc"><ref>νοῦς</ref>, <ref>πνεῦμα</ref>, <ref>ψυχικός</ref></foreign>, and cf....
3) ἄδολος       <re><emph>SYN.</emph>: <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἀκέραιος</foreign> (q.v.), <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἄκακος</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἁπλοῦς</foreign>.</re>
4) ἁγνίζω       <re><emph>SYN.</emph>: <foreign xml:lang="grc">καθαρίζω</foreign>, q.v. (and v.s. <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἁγνός</foreign>).</re>
5) ἀγρυπνέω <re><emph>SYN.</emph>: <foreign xml:lang="grc">γρηγορέω</foreign>, q.v.; <foreign xml:lang="grc">νήφω</foreign>, associated with <foreign xml:lang="grc">γ.</foreign> in...
6) ἀγάπη            <re><emph>SYN.</emph>: <foreign xml:lang="grc">φιλία</foreign>. <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἀ.</foreign>, signifying properly (v.s. <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἀγαπάω</foreign>) ...
7) ἀγαθός       <re><emph>SYN.</emph>: <foreign xml:lang="grc">καλός</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="grc">δίκαιος</foreign>. <foreign xml:lang="grc">κ.</foreign> properly refers to ...

[toddlprice]

Since v.s. is vide sub. ("see below") and q.v. is quod vice ("which see"), all the words listed under SYN. should be made into hot links which go to the entries for those words. This includes the abbreviations for the words, such as: in #5. γ. should be a hot link to γρηγορέω. in #7, κ. should be a hot link to καλός, , δ. should be a hot link to δίκαιος, etc.

[destatez]

Below is a link to a prototype report for this issue which identifies the instances for all 3 categories where references to Entries should be tagged with the tag-pair. I also identify any instances where an existing is invalid because the tagged word is not in A-S. There are also two subcategories under SYN where analysis is required for potential XML modification and/or insertion of the tag-pair. I will rerun this when all editing of the main body is complete. Please comment on whether you think I have covered the bases regarding scope of the report and/or anything about the format that needs correction and/or clarification. A_S_Reference_Analysis.txt

[toddlprice]

This looks correct for me except for: 1) is = the same as EQV? If so, why do some entries list = and some as EQV? 2) in the second section, there are many abbreviated words that SHOULD be made into entries. E.g., line 282 has "Entry ἀγαθός and SYN κ". The κ is an abbreviation for καλός and so should be linked to the entry for καλός. Many of the entries fall into that category (i.e. the abbreviations should be linked to an entry).

[destatez]

The EQV are instances where there is an "<" (<) in A-S. The " = " are instances where there is an "=" in A-S. The second section where I have identified abbreviations will need manual updates to the XML to specify the word of the abbreviation, and then to tag it. This requires manual analysis and can not be automated.

In my estimation, even the instances in the 1st section should be manually tagged. Automation would be a little difficult with all the variations of interspersed letters and words and prone to error.

[toddlprice]

OK. Sounds good!

[destatez]

I experimented with my previous file by starting to do edits on my local XML file. What I realized was having the multiple lists was not the way to go. I have combined all of the "classes" of type of changes needed to the XML with the 3 different forms that require the reference tagging. The attached is the report for only the letter alpha. The total list has over 1800 lines. A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt

[cbearden]

Is the idea to use the 'target' attribute of 'ref' to refer to the target entry? There's an example of 'ref/@target', on line 1478. Is that our model?

This is the example I found:

ἀγαθοερ-

(q.v.)

On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 3:25 AM, David Statezni notifications@github.com wrote:

I experimented with my previous file by starting to do edits on my local XML file. What I realized was having the multiple lists was not the way to go. I have combined all of the "classes" of type of changes needed to the XML with the 3 different forms that require the reference tagging. The attached is the report for only the letter alpha. The total list has over 1800 lines. A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/files/672120/A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269115639, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAaEFvixDHuF9lCE4G2owGQljnYqjIoaks5rLjZsgaJpZM4LCEpF .

[destatez]

Chuck

I'm not sure that I understand the context of what you are asking. For the '<', '=', and SYN what HAS been done is to simply wrap the 'referenced' word with '....<\ref>' so that it is a simple 'hotlink' that can be followed. I know of no other plan to further mark these referenced words.

Dave

On Dec 27, 2016 3:56 PM, "Charles Bearden" notifications@github.com wrote:

Is the idea to use the 'target' attribute of 'ref' to refer to the target entry? There's an example of 'ref/@target', on line 1478. Is that our model?

This is the example I found:

ἀγαθοερ-

(q.v.)

On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 3:25 AM, David Statezni notifications@github.com wrote:

I experimented with my previous file by starting to do edits on my local XML file. What I realized was having the multiple lists was not the way to go. I have combined all of the "classes" of type of changes needed to the XML with the 3 different forms that require the reference tagging. The attached is the report for only the letter alpha. The total list has over 1800 lines. A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/files/672120/A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269115639, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AAaEFvixDHuF9lCE4G2owGQljnYqjIoaks5rLjZsgaJpZM4LCEpF .

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269394594, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AQAi7-uv_USu2ucnhb2pWyw5DfHc7x3Bks5rMZeCgaJpZM4LCEpF .

[BramvandenHeuvel]

Hey Chuck I notice that a word following s.v. (and q.v.) needs to be ref'ed if it is in a SYN section, but what about the entries that just have "word v.s. word", should the second word also be ref'ed?

[destatez]

Bram

Scan down the message trail of this issue and see Todd's comments about s.v. and q.v. From his comments the answer would be both.

Dave

On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 2:23 AM, BramvandenHeuvel notifications@github.com wrote:

Hey Chuck I notice that a word following s.v. (and q.v.) needs to be ref'ed if it is in a SYN section, but what about the entries that just have "word v.s. word", should the second word also be ref'ed?

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269450236, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AQAi7xMGurE_uzewe_baTEUPcHCnztXDks5rMiqtgaJpZM4LCEpF .

[destatez]

I have put the full report for candidate tags in a gist: https://gist.github.com/destatez/ead063a3b2b2d1d4670243dc745fb267#file-a_s_reference_analysis_v4-txt

[cbearden]

Hi Dave,

It sounds like you were going to let your downstream software construct the hot-link from the contents of the tag; I was assuming that the tag would bear an attribute that points more exactly to the target entry, in line with the example I found of 'ref' with the 'target' attribute. This is analogous to the treatment of scripture references, where the 'ref' tag bears the 'osisRef' attribute.

Thus, where the form of the word that appears in the text isn't exactly the same as the head-word in the target entry, the text wouldn't have to be modified to disambiguate the link. by itself can tell you that a link needs to be made, but unless the contents of the unambiguously tell you what the target of the link is, you can't link to something. Am I making any sense?

Chuck

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:55 PM, David Statezni notifications@github.com wrote:

Chuck

I'm not sure that I understand the context of what you are asking. For the '<', '=', and SYN what HAS been done is to simply wrap the 'referenced' word with '....<\ref>' so that it is a simple 'hotlink' that can be followed. I know of no other plan to further mark these referenced words.

Dave

On Dec 27, 2016 3:56 PM, "Charles Bearden" notifications@github.com wrote:

Is the idea to use the 'target' attribute of 'ref' to refer to the target entry? There's an example of 'ref/@target', on line 1478. Is that our model?

This is the example I found:

ἀγαθοερ-

(q.v.)

On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 3:25 AM, David Statezni < notifications@github.com> wrote:

I experimented with my previous file by starting to do edits on my local XML file. What I realized was having the multiple lists was not the way to go. I have combined all of the "classes" of type of changes needed to the XML with the 3 different forms that require the reference tagging. The attached is the report for only the letter alpha. The total list has over 1800 lines. A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/files/672120/A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269115639, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AAaEFvixDHuF9lCE4G2owGQljnYqjIoaks5rLjZsgaJpZM4LCEpF .

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269394594, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AQAi7-uv_ USu2ucnhb2pWyw5DfHc7x3Bks5rMZeCgaJpZM4LCEpF .

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269412149, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAaEFsKI-cYw4mz_ECkUBgvfx--Zoc1Jks5rMcGhgaJpZM4LCEpF .

[destatez]

Chuck

I do not understand "unless the contents of the unambiguously tell you what the target of the link is, you can't link to something" With the

tag-pair around a Greek word, it is treated as a hot-link within the XML file. I "follow" each one I create to make sure that the other Entry is present. Yes, there is nothing in the XML which identifies what the ref is all about, but I was addressing only the ability to hot-link, which is what the end-user is most concerned about. Dave On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Charles Bearden wrote: > Hi Dave, > > It sounds like you were going to let your downstream software construct the > hot-link from the contents of the tag; I was assuming that the > tag would bear an attribute that points more exactly to the target entry, > in line with the example I found of 'ref' with the 'target' attribute. This > is analogous to the treatment of scripture references, where the 'ref' tag > bears the 'osisRef' attribute. > > Thus, where the form of the word that appears in the text isn't exactly the > same as the head-word in the target entry, the text wouldn't have to be > modified to disambiguate the link. by itself can tell you that a link > needs to be made, but unless the contents of the unambiguously tell > you what the target of the link is, you can't link to something. Am I > making any sense? > > Chuck > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:55 PM, David Statezni > wrote: > > > Chuck > > > > I'm not sure that I understand the context of what you are asking. For > the > > '<', '=', and SYN what HAS been done is to simply wrap the 'referenced' > > word with '....<\ref>' so that it is a simple 'hotlink' that can be > > followed. I know of no other plan to further mark these referenced words. > > > > Dave > > > > On Dec 27, 2016 3:56 PM, "Charles Bearden" > > wrote: > > > > > Is the idea to use the 'target' attribute of 'ref' to refer to the > target > > > entry? There's an example of 'ref/@target', on line 1478. Is that our > > > model? > > > > > > This is the example I found: > > > ἀγαθοερ- > foreign>

(q.v.)

On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 3:25 AM, David Statezni < notifications@github.com> wrote:

I experimented with my previous file by starting to do edits on my local XML file. What I realized was having the multiple lists was not the way to go. I have combined all of the "classes" of type of changes needed to the XML with the 3 different forms that require the reference tagging. The attached is the report for only the letter alpha. The total list has over 1800 lines. A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/files/672120/A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269115639, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AAaEFvixDHuF9lCE4G2owGQljnYqjIoaks5rLjZsgaJpZM4LCEpF .

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269394594, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AQAi7-uv_ USu2ucnhb2pWyw5DfHc7x3Bks5rMZeCgaJpZM4LCEpF .

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269412149, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAaEFsKI-cYw4mz_ ECkUBgvfx--Zoc1Jks5rMcGhgaJpZM4LCEpF .

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269484310, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AQAi70pykvB4ms6f2_ACW1PJVSa7lLv7ks5rMnJ7gaJpZM4LCEpF .

[cbearden]

Hi Dave,

I think I understand what you have in mind. A question to illustrate where I'm coming from:

In the case of the 'ἀγαθός' SYN section, if you tag the 'κ.' with a bare

, like so: κ. what will this hotlink to? There is no indication in the markup which headword beginning with 'κ' will point. In the case that the tag encloses a word that matches exactly the form of a unique headword, there's no problem. But in this case, there is ambiguity. I was assuming (probably wrongly) that there would be an attribute like the 'href' for the element to provide the information for the link. If I'm not making sense, I'll drop the issue. Chuck On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 10:31 AM, David Statezni wrote: > Chuck > > I do not understand "unless the contents of the unambiguously tell > you what the target of the link is, you can't link to something" With the > tag-pair around a Greek word, it is treated as a hot-link within the > XML file. I "follow" each one I create to make sure that the other Entry is > present. Yes, there is nothing in the XML which identifies what the ref is > all about, but I was addressing only the ability to hot-link, which is what > the end-user is most concerned about. > > Dave > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Charles Bearden > > wrote: > > > > Hi Dave, > > > > It sounds like you were going to let your downstream software construct > the > > hot-link from the contents of the tag; I was assuming that the > > > tag would bear an attribute that points more exactly to the target entry, > > in line with the example I found of 'ref' with the 'target' attribute. > This > > is analogous to the treatment of scripture references, where the 'ref' > tag > > bears the 'osisRef' attribute. > > > > Thus, where the form of the word that appears in the text isn't exactly > the > > same as the head-word in the target entry, the text wouldn't have to be > > modified to disambiguate the link. by itself can tell you that a > link > > needs to be made, but unless the contents of the unambiguously tell > > you what the target of the link is, you can't link to something. Am I > > making any sense? > > > > Chuck > > > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:55 PM, David Statezni < > notifications@github.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > I'm not sure that I understand the context of what you are asking. For > > the > > > '<', '=', and SYN what HAS been done is to simply wrap the 'referenced' > > > word with '....<\ref>' so that it is a simple 'hotlink' that can > be > > > followed. I know of no other plan to further mark these referenced > words. > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > On Dec 27, 2016 3:56 PM, "Charles Bearden" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Is the idea to use the 'target' attribute of 'ref' to refer to the > > target > > > > entry? There's an example of 'ref/@target', on line 1478. Is that our > > > > model? > > > > > > > > This is the example I found: > > > > ἀγαθοερ- > > foreign>

(q.v.)

On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 3:25 AM, David Statezni < notifications@github.com> wrote:

I experimented with my previous file by starting to do edits on my local XML file. What I realized was having the multiple lists was not the way to go. I have combined all of the "classes" of type of changes needed to the XML with the 3 different forms that require the reference tagging. The attached is the report for only the letter alpha. The total list has over 1800 lines. A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/files/672120/A_S_Reference_Analysis_V4-Alpha_only.txt

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269115639, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AAaEFvixDHuF9lCE4G2owGQljnYqjIoaks5rLjZsgaJpZM4LCEpF .

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269394594, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AQAi7-uv_ USu2ucnhb2pWyw5DfHc7x3Bks5rMZeCgaJpZM4LCEpF .

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269412149, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAaEFsKI-cYw4mz_ ECkUBgvfx--Zoc1Jks5rMcGhgaJpZM4LCEpF .

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/ Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269484310, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AQAi70pykvB4ms6f2_ ACW1PJVSa7lLv7ks5rMnJ7gaJpZM4LCEpF .

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-269501688, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAaEFmQYdYh_YnMDRklUjjYYr6JA8ewMks5rMo7MgaJpZM4LCEpF .

[destatez]

Chuck

You have a very good point, and one that I brought up to Todd. See his answer to a related instance in: https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/66#issuecomment-268749055 . For all of these cases my report identifies these single letters and requests analysis for manual update.

Dave