感謝兩位。
我想現在我知道我們的專案將如何樣式化這類內容了。
我也意識到,我真正的問題並非關於這些具體問題。而是:「如果 USFM 是一個標準,我如何確定在特定情況下哪一個是正確的標記。」
CrazyRocky 提到 NIV 對回答這個問題很有幫助,因為這引導我下載了 10 到 15 個不同的主要資源並進行比較。我發現,在使用的標記方面存在驚人大的差異——有時甚至在同一个專案中也是如此!
基於此,並結合閱讀 USFM 文件,我的結論是,USFM 作為標準,僅在於它限制了應該使用的標記數量。而且在許多情況下,它提供了關於這些標記應如何使用的一般性建議。但它並不是我最初所認為的那種標準,因為它並沒有真正列出應該(和不應該)使用某個標記的具體情況。它似乎只是拋出一組標記,並在某些限制下說「請隨意使用這些」。
Thank you both.
I think I now know how our projects will style these sorts of things.
I’ve also realized that my true question wasn’t regarding these specific issues. Rather it was: “If USFM is a standard, how do I determine which is the correct marker to use in a given circumstance.”
CrazyRocky’s mention of NIV was helpful in answering this, because it lead me to downloading 10 or 15 different major resources and comparing them. What I found is that there is a shockingly large amount of variance in which markers are used–sometimes within the same project!
My conclusion from that, along with reading the USFM documentation, is that USFM is only a standard in that it limits the number of markers which ought to be used. And in many cases it gives general suggestions for how those markers ought to be used. But it’s not a standard in the way I was originally thinking, as it doesn’t really list exact circumstances when a marker should (and shouldn’t) be used. It seems like it just throws out a group of markers and, with some limitations, says “use these as you see fit”.
機器翻譯自 English