USFM markup question

54 views
Skip to first unread message

Open English Bible

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 6:15:18 AM12/9/15
to openscr...@googlegroups.com
Hi, I was wondering if there was someone on this list who could help.

The OEB, like many modern Bibles has some ‘missing’ verses. For example, Mark 7:15 is followed by Mark 7:17.

I’d like to footnote the text which isn’t included, with markup current something like:

\v 15 \wj There is nothing external to a person, which by going into them can ‘defile’ them; but the things that come out of a person are the things that defile them.”\wj*
\v 16 \f + Some later manuscripts add: Let anyone with ears to hear, listen.\f*
\p
\v 17 When Jesus went indoors, away from the crowd, his disciples began questioning him about this saying.

Does this work? I can’t find anything which talks about it specifically in the USFM standard.  Or should I do:

\v 15 \wj There is nothing external to a person, which by going into them can ‘defile’ them; but the things that come out of a person are the things that defile them.”\wj* \f + Some later manuscripts add as verse 16: Let anyone with ears to hear, listen.\f*
\p
\v 17 When Jesus went indoors, away from the crowd, his disciples began questioning him about this saying.

…and leave out the verse marker for Mk 7:16?

Or is there some way to mark a verse in USFM as intentionally absent?

Either way the SIL Translation Editor marks the verse as missing. I don’t have access to Paratext so I don’t know what it does.

Thanks! Russell


Peter Von Kaehne

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 6:40:48 AM12/9/15
to openscr...@googlegroups.com
I think both is valid and it depends very much on what to want to achieve and how much you want to stress the point that you removed a verse.
 
Peter
 
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 09. Dezember 2015 um 11:14 Uhr
Von: "Open English Bible" <oeb...@openenglishbible.org>
An: openscr...@googlegroups.com
Betreff: USFM markup question
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Scriptures" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openscripture...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to openscr...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openscriptures.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Kahunapule Michael Johnson

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 1:29:45 PM12/9/15
to openscr...@googlegroups.com
Although either method is correct, I prefer your first example, i.e. having a verse with nothing but a footnote in it. This converts better to various Bible study program outputs, and give a better user experience when someone tries to navigate to the "missing" verse. It shows the user that the software is working, but the verse was relegated to a footnote for textual criticism reasons. If you just totally omit the verse, the user may or may not find the explanation in footnote in the previous verse. Also, Paratext likes this better, not marking the verse as empty. In Paratext, to pass publication checks, totally empty verses require a versification exception listed in a custom versification file, but if a verse contains a footnote, the versification exception isn't required.
--

Aloha,
Kahunapule Michael Johnson

MICHAEL JOHNSON
PO BOX 881143
PUKALANI HI 96788-1143

USA
eBible.org
MLJohnson.org
Mobile: +1 808-333-6921
Skype: kahunapule

Russell Allen

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 4:59:26 PM12/9/15
to openscr...@googlegroups.com
Thanks guys, that’s helpful.
Michael’s reasons below sound pretty sound so I think I’ll do as he suggests.

I do have another question - we have a number of section breaks which aren’t associated with a section heading text. When these are turned into a PDF or doc using our software they come out as a few lines of vertical whitespace to indicate that a new section has started. This is similar to what the NEB used to do - it marks out the chunk of narrative without imposing a ‘this is what this is about’ heading on it.

The USFM spec though mandates that \s has some associated text with it. 

What’s the best way to do this? Do I just use plain \s and not meet the standard, or can I fake it with \s ~ or similar? Or should I be using something custom like \zSectionBreak?

Thanks! Russell

Kahunapule Michael Johnson

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 6:30:27 PM12/9/15
to openscr...@googlegroups.com
The appropriate USFM markup for a line of white space is \b. This works for poetry stanza breaks as well as untitled section breaks in prose. Bizarre and creative extensions like \zAnything are unlikely to work as you intend when the time comes to publish, so it is best to color within the lines of the USFM specification as much as you can.

Russell Allen

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 7:12:13 PM12/9/15
to openscr...@googlegroups.com
Yes, we are using \b for poetry stanza breaks. It is only a single line break, though. I can’t find a decent scan of a page of the NEB online, but it is a genuine section break. The vertical whitespace is larger, and the next paragraph is dealt with differently (starting with small caps). 

Hmm. Maybe I can make my USFM->PDF/HTML generator recognise the difference between \b in poetry and \b in prose?

I hear what you’re saying about \zStuff and will avoid.

Thanks, Russell 

Kahunapule Michael Johnson

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 8:28:51 PM12/9/15
to openscr...@googlegroups.com
Making your USFM->PDF/HTML generator treat \b as you wish is a nice solution.
Please note, however, that your expectations should not include being able to control the presentation that everyone will use with an open Bible translation. One of the first things I saw with the World English Bible was that people would freely strip out even the most basic formatting, like poetic line breaks, paragraph breaks, etc., for use in their applications. Such is the destiny, at least in some cases, for a Public Domain modern English Bible. Of course, that doesn't stop you from formatting it how you like when you do your own conversions to HTML, PDF, etc.

By the way, I think you missed the opportunity to produce the first completely free (Public Domain) modern English translation of the Holy Bible, as your web site proclaims you are trying to do. Carry on, though. Perhaps your translation will appeal to a different audience than the others. The more people reading and heeding God's Word, the better. ;-)

Russell Allen

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 8:39:13 PM12/9/15
to openscr...@googlegroups.com
On 10 Dec 2015, at 12:28 pm, Kahunapule Michael Johnson <Kahun...@eBible.org> wrote:

Making your USFM->PDF/HTML generator treat \b as you wish is a nice solution.
Please note, however, that your expectations should not include being able to control the presentation that everyone will use with an open Bible translation. One of the first things I saw with the World English Bible was that people would freely strip out even the most basic formatting, like poetic line breaks, paragraph breaks, etc., for use in their applications. Such is the destiny, at least in some cases, for a Public Domain modern English Bible. Of course, that doesn't stop you from formatting it how you like when you do your own conversions to HTML, PDF, etc.

I have over time become much more aware of the importance of the Bible looking like other modern texts and not like some sort of textual database or reference material like a dictionary, so I like trying to get paragraphs etc right, but of course people taking the OEB can do whatever they want, whether I approve or not :)

By the way, I think you missed the opportunity to produce the first completely free (Public Domain) modern English translation of the Holy Bible, as your web site proclaims you are trying to do.

You are right - I will change that.

Carry on, though. Perhaps your translation will appeal to a different audience than the others.

In the FAQ I position the OEB as an NIV or REB to the WEB’s ESV. I have always seen the OEB as complementary to the WEB, not an intended successor or replacement.

The more people reading and heeding God's Word, the better. ;-)

Amen!

Russell

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages