Re: Arabic Quran XML data

[Nadim Shaikli <shaikli at yahoo dot com>]

--- Mete Kural <metekural at yahoo dot com> wrote:
> Ossama K wrote:
> > Fixing? Like what? Mistakes, glyphs or what?
> 
> The current text in the CVS is missing many diacritics
> and other special characters as you may have noticed.
> I was referring to adding those special characters.

I don't think any of us should be adding/modifying anything
until we get a proper authority to guide us in order for us
to do the "right" thing.

> > As far as I remember, various previous threads noted
> > that you'll not be able to modify things and that
> > the content will be correct and solid.
> 
> I understand not being allowed to make changes once
> the content is "correct and solid" but until that is
> so someone has to make changes and correct it. As of
> now, there are still many changes that need to be
> made, i.e. adding special characters.

No one claimed that the XML data is complete.  I suggest you
concentrate on the actual application code and not the contents
of the XML data as I'm sure there are plenty of areas worth
looking into and improving upon (let alone implementing new
features and whatnot).  Until we get proper guidance from
Qurancomplex (or similar), I am _VERY_ uneasy about making or
introducing any changes or even remotely claiming that the data
files are complete and/or accurate.

> > As discussed before, the GPL wouldn't be suitable at
> > all, because it allows _anyone_ to do _any changes_
> > which is so dangerous.
> 
> I believe that changes should be allowed for purposes
> of modifying the Arabic text to comply with
> manuscripts other than the King Fahd manuscript, such
> as the Tashkent Quran and other newer manuscripts.

Not to start a non-related thread on this, but again we are not
to make such decisions until a proper higher authority can give
us guidance.  What has happened in the course of history is no
justification for continual deviation and I for one suggest we
get someone in here who is appropriately schooled and justified
to make correct decisions.

> > I think this isn't 100% correct. Having different
> > readings doesn't mean we also have different
> > spelling.
> 
> Well, as you may be aware of it, there are visible
> spelling differences among different Quran manuscripts
> that are popular in different countries. For instance
> many Quran manuscripts in Iran and Turkey have extra
> alefs in them that are not in the King Fahd printing.
> Some 19th century manuscripts have different spellings
> as well. So it is not just a difference in reading,
> but also spelling. Even if it was only a difference in
> reading, it would still be necessary to change the
> diacritics in the text in order to comply to different
> readings.

Read my comments above - we are not qualified to make any
changes period (and I realize that what we are holding now
is not proper/correct), but we need to stop any further
changes so as not to fool ourselves into thinking we are
doing anything useful and get outside proper help ASAP.
 
I highly recommend all people put in the extra effort to contact
world respected and renowned authorities for proper help and in
the meantime, concentrate on polishing and finishing up the
application code and GUI along with the art work, etc (and don't
be too preoccupied with the XML data content).

Salam.

 - Nadim


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com