7

Related request from C.SE

While the majority of our users are currently, Christian, I recognize that this may not always be the case. Nonetheless, it seems that BibleGateway is a popular reference here for biblical quotations. As such, I wanted to propose this feature request to determine whether it would be useful for those here on this site.

I believe it would beneficial to have either some markup or one-box support for BibleGateway. Something along the lines of:

[bg version=NIV book=Genesis 1:1-5]

Should turn into:

Genesis 1:1-5 (NIV)

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

For comments, it would be nice if the same markup could be used to insert a link, like such:

[bg version=NIV book=Genesis 1] tells about creation.

turning into:

Genesis 1 (NIV) tells about creation.

Ideally, the section should have a limited vertical height. This will help with long passages (entire chapters, for example).

It would also ideal that the "version=" attribute should be required. There should not be a default version of the Bible, since this would amount to an endorsement of a certain translation over others. (Although it should be noted that BibleGateway.com itself defaults to NIV.)

Finally, it's important to note that creating the markup does not imply endorsement of BibleGateway (seeing as one-box in chat is available for Youtube, Wikipedia, XKCD, etc.) I'm simply requesting BibleGateway as it would is seems to be commonly used on this site. Furthermore, alternate translations not found on BibleGateway could be added manually (just like all scripture is currently added), so that alternative versions would still be as available as they are today.

6
  • Obviously, the C.SE proposal is a near direct copy of this. However, I posted here to help gauge the interest of this feature from this community. More support across more sites might help SE staff see the interest. – Richard Nov 14 '11 at 15:47
  • Is this instead of a userscript? – Jack Douglas Nov 14 '11 at 15:55
  • @JackDouglas Yeah, there are a couple of user scripts out there. I'm not really fond of user scripts myself. I find myself not having much faith in them. Also, they're somewhat untested in my browser of choice (Opera). – Richard Nov 14 '11 at 16:00
  • I agree! But I fear SE will turn down our feature request and it would be good to have something to fall back on, no? :) – Jack Douglas Nov 14 '11 at 16:11
  • @JackDouglas Oh sure, there's always the manual addition of scripture. It's what we do now. User scripts just automate it. Onebox actually increases the usability of the site, imo. SE might turn this down, but I suspect that they won't even consider it until one or both sites go live, which could be a while. – Richard Nov 14 '11 at 16:16
  • I don't know what it entails on the server side, but as a user interface that look remarkably handy. I notice it would not support the NJPS (or JPS) Tanakh, which is unfortunate. But I don't know of any "Bible version aggregation" that does. – Jon Ericson Nov 14 '11 at 17:11

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .