Written by:
Jonathon Blake
This is some material that was originally going to be in my talk The Ecology of e-Sword at BibleTech 2010.
-
Data portability
Are the same resources available for your:
- PDA;
- Cell Phone;
- Mobile Device;
- Netbook;
- Laptop;
- Desktop;
Can content between those devices be synchronized?
-
- Laridian almost passes the “Data Portability” requirement. If your netbook, laptop, and desktop run 32 bit Windows, it might “pass”. If your desktop is on a different OS, then it barely “fails”.
-
- Olive Tree Software offers products for most mobile devices, but doesn’t appear to offer a way to synchronize between them.
-
- The Sword Project offers front ends for more operating systems, and platforms than any other organization that delivers Bible Study Software. However, they currently don’t offer tools to synchronize between programs.
-
Future Proofing
- Can your existing resources be used on your new computer/mobile device?
- Can the resources that you create be easily imported into the program?
- Can the resources that you create be easily exported from that program?
-
- Laridian almost passes the “Future Proofing” requirement. If your new
platform is a mobile device, the odds are that they have a product
for that device. They also offer BookBuilder, which enables one to create one’s original content as a resource for their software.
-
- Olive Tree Software — the other player in the mobile device Bible Study Software market — offers specifications for Olive Tree Markup Language. What is not easilly discovered, is where, and how that markup language can be used.
-
- The Sword Project offers a plethora of tools that enable one to create their own resources. It also offers tools that enable one to easily extract the data from the resources. All existing Sword Project resources can be used on any current front end. The “catch” is that not all front ends are equal.
-
Resources
- The primary issue is: “Which Bible Study Program currently
offers the resources that your will use?”
- Not what resources they plan to offer.
- Not what resources are currently available.
- Not what tools are available for creating resources.
- Laridian, and, to a lesser extent Olive Tree, operate on the theory that people won’t be carrying around large digital libraries. “Large” means anything more than somewhere between 100 and 500 digital works.
-
- Libronix operates on the theory that 1 500 digital works in one’s library
will constitute a “small” library. As such, they currently offer resource collections that cover most of the spectrum of Christian Theology.
-
-
-
- Whilst more 10 000 user created resources are available for e Sword, less than a third of them can be legally distributed. Roughly 500 have been officially distributed. The results of a poll on e Sword-users.org imply that the majority of e Sword users have less than 300 resources installed on their system — a claim that Rick Meyers has made for years.
-
Tools to create Resources
- A pastor, preaching fifty new sermons a year, can publish a book every six months. If that content can be digitally published, in a format that
integrates with the recommended Bible Study Program for the congregation, it is a win for both the congregation, and the
pastor.
-
-
-
- The core issue here is whether or not users will experience any functional
difference between the digital content that is distributed by their pastor, and that distributed by the program developers.
-
-
-
- Molly Mormon, whose sole content creation is limited to taking notes at
Church and Bible Study, can generate a significant amount of content
over the course of time. Content that can be digitally distributed with others, for their edification.
-
How do you study the Bible
- I’m not going to list all of the different ways to study the Bible here. I
am aware of roughly 200 different points of departure, in studying
the Bible.
- Most of those can be listed under one of the following:
- Book, chapter, verse orientated;
- Chronologically orientated;
- Creed/Catechism orientated;
- Original Language orientated;
- Topically orientated;
- Who/where orientated;
- Each of those points of departure requires a different set of functions, and resources.
-
- Does the software program offer:
- The appropriate tools?
- The appropriate resources?
-
- For book, chapter, verse orientated study:
- Do the Bibles contain the books that are canonical for your branch of Christianity?
- Does the versification scheme reflect that of your
branch of Christianity, or denomination within that branch?
If your study is chronologically orientated:
- Do the tools assist you in locating texts of the same period in time?
- Can you alter those tools, so that they reflect the chronology that one believes to be accurate, or to include passages that were omitted.
If your study you study is orientated along creed/catechism lines:
- Does it include the Creed or Catechism that you use?
- Are the references within it also available as resources for that program?
- Are those references linkable from the creed or catechism?
If your study is orientated along original languages, or linguistic analysis
- Does it contain resources in the languages that you study?
- Does it offer tools that help one do morphological analysis?
- Does it offer tools that enable one to do linguistic analysis?
- For advanced users, can all five requests laid out at the SBL
Bible Software Shootout be easily done?
If your study is topically orientated:
- How do the available tools aid that process?
- How do the available tools hinder that process?
- Do the available resources cover the topics you study?
If you study is who/where orientated:
- Is a list of all of the characters, both named, and unnamed, that are mentioned in the Bible, available?
- Is a list of all places, both named, and unnamed, that are mentioned in the Bible, available?
- Are these lists fully congruent with the one that you use in your study?
- Are these lists congruent with your theology? (Maps are especially susceptible to theological bias.)
- Do the provided tools enable one to see a timeline of the place, and the individual, simultaneously?
-
Accessibility
What functionality is lost by removing:
- The keyboard;
- The mouse;
- The monitor;
- The monitor and the mouse;
- The monitor and the keyboard;
- The keyboard and the mouse;
- The monitor, mouse, and keyboard;
-
- If any functionality is lost by the removal of any, much less all of those, then the program is not accessible. If program functionality requires any of those items, then it should be rejected on sight, regardless of any other merits it might have. This applies regardless of any current accessibility requirements of the potential user.
-
-
- For both the User Interface, and the resources, how easy is it for the user
to change:
- Fonts;
- Font size;
- Font background colour;
- Font foreground colour;
- Overall foreground colour;
- Overall background colour;
-
- Does the program offer the ability to selectively magnify sections of the screen?
- Can every item on the menu be reached by a keystroke combination?
- Is the functionality of every icon instantly recognizable?
- Are icon labels coherent?
-
- #####
-
The specifications that define the file format used by The Sword Project have changed over the last decade. The front ends have not always incorporated those changes in file
format specifications.
Xiphos probably is best described as being the bleeding edge of The
Sword Project front ends.
This is the virtue of the Watch Tower Library CD (2008), for adherents of the
theology of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, or LSD Library 2009, for adherents of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
A critical edition of Science and Health with a Key to the Scriptures is of little use to those who do not study the writings of Mary Baker Eddy.
Whilst the ability to create one’s own resources is a virtue, the limiting factor is the amount of time one has to both learn how to create the resource, and then to create it.
Material on the fringes of Christian theology, such as Christian Atheism, and Christian Wicca is not represented in their resource collections. Nor have I been able to find any individual resources in those areas.
Resources for both Christian Atheism, and Christian Wicca can be found!
This refers to resources that have been publicly distributed at some point in time. It does not include resources that were never distributed by their creator.
Giving users the ability to easily create resources also gives them the ability to easily violate copyright law. Whether or not providing that ability is “criminal conspiracy to violate copyright law” has not yet been tested in the courts. It is, however, a stick that publishers have considered using.
Roughly five years ago I studied some essays and sermons written by the pastor of the church I currently attend. About a year after I started attending my current church, — three years after I studied that material — that I connected that material, with the pastor of my current church.
I am reminded here of the spinster who, every year purchased a new leather Bible, and read it daily. At the end of the year, she gave her Bible to a pastor, so he could take advantage of the notes, markup, and other things that she had written in it, over the course of the year.
The points of departure that don’t fall into those six groups have their own separate, specific issues. Nonetheless, the two fundamental questions remain: Resources and tools appropriate to that specific point of departure.
Perhaps an extreme, but consider The Ethiopiac Canon of Eighty One (Narrower Canon).
AFAIK, none of the currently available Bible Study programs can “correctly” handle that canon.
Contrast the versification scheme of the Russian Orthodox Synod Bible, with
that of the KJV
For example, The German Lutheran Bible uses a versification scheme that is different from both the KJV, and the LXX/TR.
As one example, all of the Chronological Bibles I have used, omit Psalm 151. Most of them also manage to place John 1:1 at a fairly distant point in time from Genesis 1:1.
One of the issues within Aramaic Primacy, is that no generally accepted critical edition of the Peshitta exists. This lack hampers critical research in Aramaic Studies. A side effect is that “missing” critical research, is that Bible Study Software developers are in the lurch, not knowing if the resources they do provide, are going to the “academic” choice in the near future, much less intermediate future.
I recognize that programming for this is very difficult. However, like most alternations that are done to enhance accessibility, those changes will have a greater impact on those who do not have accessibility requirements, than those that do.
Learning to use accessible hardware and software is a steep enough learning curve, without having to simultaneously learn to use software that replaces the old, inaccessible software that one was using.
More than one popular program labels its icons as “icon1”, “icon2”, “icon3”, “icon4”.
This footnote is for tracking purposes only.
