Google Groups


Robin Riley Jan 19, 2012 3:54 PM
Posted in group: Open Scriptures
It's been awhile (10/2009) since the idea for adding a transliteration
option was suggested, and favorable discussed ... is this still 
something that is being considered?


On Oct 18 2009, 12:04 pm, Jesse Griffin <> wrote:

> I think we are in agreement, we are approaching transliteration from
> different angles.  The goals of Open Scriptures are more in line with
> linking and providing access to as much Scriptural data as possible.  Thus,
> linking several transliterations to the manuscript data seems to be the best
> route.  Our about page states:
> Open Scriptures seeks to be a comprehensive open-source Web repository for
> integrated scriptural data and a general application framework for building
> internationalized social applications of scripture. An abundance of
> scriptural resources are now available online—manuscripts, translations, and
> annotations are all being made available by students and scholars alike at
> an ever-increasing rate. These diverse scriptural resources, however, are
> isolated from each other and fragmented across the Internet. Thus mashing up
> the available data into new scriptural applications is not currently
> possible for the community at large because the resources’
> interrelationships are not systematically documented. Open Scriptures aims
> to establish a scriptural database for interlinked textual resources such as
> merged manuscripts, the differences among them, and the links between their
> semantic units and the semantic units of their translations... (
> I think it's safe to say we could add transliterations to growing list of
> "manuscripts, translations, and annotations."  Regarding man power, after
> coding the first transliteration schema into the [as yet uncreated] system
> the subsequent schema's will be very easy to add because much of the code
> will likely will be reusable.
> It really is a good idea to add transliteration(s) into our list of
> scriptural data to link.  As the software framework takes shape in the near
> future we should definitely keep this in mind.
> Thanks for the ideas Robin!
> Jesse