See in Reader
Mrk/front/intro Em-dashes in Book Outline #6
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s(<nil>)"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
In the intro to Mark, some of the em-dashes have a space before them, and some have a space after them. I don't know what it should be.
I see the same thing in the Intros to Matthew, Luke,
The are no spaces there in the Intros to Gen, Exo, Lev, Jhn, Acts
I haven't checked other books. I wonder if this is something that can be cleaned up with a simple search and replace.
Note: What I see as "spaces" comes up as boxes on Chris's computer.
Someone else will need to answer about the search and replace, but I suggest removing the em dashes and spaces.
Example:
1:1-13
1:1-2:41
1:14-3:6
In the pdf, this is what it looks like.
• Early ministry (1:14—-3:6)
• Jesus becomes more popular among the people (3:7—-5:43)
• Moving away from Galilee and then returning (6:1—-8:26)
misunderstand, and Jesus teaches them how difficult it will be to follow him (8:27—-10:52)
How do we want to fix this? Em-dash? Hyphen?
Do we use the same mark both for ranges of verses within a chapter and for ranges of verses between chapters?
@hmw3 @TomWarren @JohnH
In standard practice, en dashes are used for ranges, like «1–20», and there should be no spaces before or after. We've been using hyphens instead of en dashes for these so far, and I see no reason to change the policy.
Sometimes they are used in text in place of em dashes, e.g., «... he knows – at least he thinks the does – that ...».
Em dashes are usually only used in text, e.g., «... he knows—at least he thinks the does—that ...». Some Bible publishers, but not all, will use them for passage ranges that go across chapter boundaries: «Genesis 1:5–16; 4:3—5:6», and that system appeals to the Pharisee in me. But using hyphens would probably work just as well for us: «Genesis 1:5-16; 4:3-5:6 [or 4:3 - 5:6]».
They tend to be typeset with half-spaces on either side. Where I used to work, we edited so there were no spaces, but the typesetters put them in for printing. Another way to do it would be to have spaces on either side and do mass search-and-replace to eliminate double spaces.
I like en-dashes for simple verse ranges within a chapter and em-dashes for verse ranges that go across chapter boundaries. (I find them easier to read.) But if we have mainly been using hyphens, it seems good to keep with that.
Could a search and replace be done to change all the dashes that occur between numbers with hyphens? (or all the hyphens to a particular kind of dash)?
What about when dashes are used between years, as in "about 640–621 B.C." in the Intro to Zephaniah? Would we want the mark between years to be dashes or hyphens?
Well, groovy, another Pharisee—welcome to the synagogue, @SusanQuigley !
A consistent change can be made either way. Many of us use Windows machines, and I don't know how easy it is to put in dashes, so we may have to make do with hyphens, but if the Windows crowd can type them easily, sez I, let's do it. Otherwise, we can easily hyphenize the dashes of anything in a Git repository. But either way, we should be consistent.
I like hyphens for everything because I can't every remember how to make em or en dashes :)
If my memory serves me .... the en dash, em dash, hyphen choice was a DuKuWiki thing. @craig is there the same need in Git to be selective on the choice of en dash, em dash, or hyphens?
Knowing this might help make the decision for us Pharisees :)
Another tack to take would be to go with hyphens and let the PDF renderer make the changes.
If we didn't already have a Pantocrator, scripts would be a contender for the throne :-D .
The concern here is about hyphens or em-dashes between verse numbers.
We have hyphens in links. We don't want any changes to hyphens to break the links. (However, I don't think they're supposed to show up with hyphens in the HTML file. I think they're supposed to look like a word or phrase.)
We also have some TM pages that have a number following a hyphen (rc://en/ta/man/jit/figs-123person). We don't want any change to affect them.
It looks like what we need to find is hyphens that follow a numeral as in the notes below.
the Philistines came and lived in them
"the Philistines came and lived in the cities from which the Israelites had fled." This probably happened after the events in verses 8-12.
Some translations set poetry farther to the right than the rest of the text to show that it is poetry. The ULB does this with the poetic song in 1:19-27.
TN has 427 instances of the em-dash shown in the first post above.
In BBEdit, the space before or after those em-dashes shows up as a red upside-down question mark. When I paste that question mark into a Multi-File Search window, it shows up like this: \x{96}.
There are only 26 instances of \x{96} in tN. It's only in the book Intros to Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
All of the em-dashes that occur in verse references are in book introductions (not in the files for individual verses).
We have also have a tN with an em-dash because it is in the ULB. Job 3:8:
Those who curse the day–may they curse it, those who know how to wake up Leviathan
ULB - Only in Job 3:8
UDB - No em-dashes (like the ones above)
tW -
tQ - in 7 files. Some have 2 spaces, some have 1, and one has none.
I don't know if these are the only em-dashes in our resources, or if we have em-dashes (or attempts at em-dashes) made with different key strokes or codes.
I wonder if I should just go into those three intros in TN and remove the space before or after the em-dash. Though it looks like an ordinary space on WACS, it's really the \x{96} that shows up differently in on http://read.bibletranslationtools.org/u/WycliffeAssociates/en_tn/2f113d6df7/42-MRK.html#tn-chapter-mrk-front and in BBEdit.
Maybe that's all that's needed.
This en-dash – was used in 50 book (and possibly chapter) Intro.md files, starting with Gen, and including Mat, Mrk and Luke. These are primarily in verse references: some are between chapters and some are within chapters.
The hyphen - is used in links, compound words, and verse references. It is used in 23345 files, including some of the book intros and the outlines in them (Such as 1co/front/intro.md) Of those in verse references, some are between chapters and some are within chapters.
The em-dash — is used 1790 times in the ULB. It occurs 281 times in tN only between words, not numbers.
I deleted \x{96} in the intro.md files for Matt, Mrk, and Luk. They look good on WACS.
Two en-dashes have a space before and after: (1 Kings 17 – 2 Kings 2) and (2 Kings 18 – 20).
No en-dashes have just a space before or after.
Two hyphens in verse references have a space before and after (21:12 - 23:8) and (7:53 - 8:11)
I don't know if there are other symbols used as attempts at hyphens and dashes.
Even though it's not ideal to have a mix of symbols or a mix of spacing before and after symbols, I wonder if it's ok to leave it as is until we find something that really looks odd.
I think we should run a script, if possible, and remove the spaces before and after all em-dashes, en-dashes, and hyphens. Also run a script and change all en-dashes to hyphens, this would make things consistent.
Craig showed me how to use grep to do searches in BBEdit.
I removed the spaces that weren't needed.
I changed hyphens to em-dashes in sentences. (I hope I got them all.)
Spaces next to hyphens or dashes are OK in:
config.yaml
toc.yaml
tM topic titles
Definitions or explanations in appendices.
Definitions or explanations in tM.
(There are 1299 spaces after hyphens or dashes in tM. Most are fine. I did not check them all.)
Question: Are the spaces ok here?
\v 29 \f + \ft Acts 28:29 - The oldest and most accurate ancient copies of the book of Acts do not include the additional words found in Acts 28:29; for that reason they are not included here. \f
Structure and formatting
This is the beginning of the story of Elijah. (1 Kings 17 – 2 Kings 2)
I am fine with the space after the hypen on the UDB footnote.
I also fine with the en-dash, but I don't understand its purpose. Does the en-dash communicate something specific that a hypen or Em-dash does not?
See Henry's first post above.
Some publishers use en-dash between verses. We mostly used hyphens. It may be that the person who wrote this used an en-dash between the two books to make it clearer that it was connecting books, not verses -- especially since the second book name begins with a numeral.
The en-dash and the space afterwards looks fine to me.
Ok. I'll leave this as they are.
\v 29 \f + \ft Acts 28:29 - The oldest and most accurate ancient copies of the book of Acts do not include the additional words found in Acts 28:29; for that reason they are not included here. \f
Structure and formatting
This is the beginning of the story of Elijah. (1 Kings 17 – 2 Kings 2)
The ULB text has 1789 em-dashes. (—).
The UDB text has 872 em-dashes. (—).
The UDB text has 1340 hyphens. (-)