« first day (2091 days earlier)      last day (2505 days later) » 

Dɑvïd
Dɑvïd
8:28 AM
@Caleb Btw - were you inclined to post your solution (possibly with commentary) to that Unix.SE Q&A? Yours is more elegant than the perl one posted, and I'd prefer perl to python... But if not, I'll accept one of the correct answers provided. No rush, of course: but if you're intending to post, I'll hold off.
 
Caleb
Caleb
8:48 AM
@Dɑvïd Yes I am planning to answer, but I ran into some trouble explaining why what I was doing worked.
@Dɑvïd My thinking on punctuation has been heavily influenced by Shady Characters.
@Dɑvïd Yes I did. Speaking of which....
I'm looking for a high-ish res shot of a manuscript to use in a book cover. Specifically a Greek manuscript of Revelation.
Any ideas?
 
Dɑvïd
Dɑvïd
9:22 AM
@Caleb Possibly the raking light view of Codex Sinaiticus?
Would probably need permission, but worth a shot. It looks like P18 is the oldest Greek ms available for Rev, but not sure how their permissions work.
 
Caleb
Caleb
@Dɑvïd Actually for this bit I think the standard light might be better, but that's the idea for sure. Looks like getting a high res bit as a whole rather than in chunks might be tricky.
 
Dɑvïd
Dɑvïd
9:37 AM
@Caleb Yep. Wonder if they would supply a decent JPG of that sheet?
Also, BL 2053 (=P18) looks nifty: Exodus on recto, Revelation on verso!
@Caleb The verso is upside-down in the BL viewer, but you can sure get in close!
 
Dɑvïd
Dɑvïd
9:54 AM
Sinaiticus sheet appears to be Q90_1v_B678_p.jpg, but you probably worked that out already. ;)
 
Dɑvïd
Dɑvïd
10:32 AM
Maybe you could do something funky with tracing the image?
Although that might still require permission of some kind? I'm really not sure how that works...
 
Dɑvïd
Dɑvïd
10:51 AM
Or....???
 
curiousdannii
curiousdannii
11:43 AM
@Dɑvïd Rather like my ad for the Greek proposal
 
Dɑvïd
Dɑvïd
12:17 PM
@curiousdannii Ha! Yes indeed. "Great minds...", κ.τ.λ. ;) Only Gentium for Permian, and differing BG opacities/fades.
 
 
5 hours later…
ScottS
ScottS
5:11 PM
I'm seeing more and more comments and reasoning like this:
I'm not sure you have understood my suggestion. The purpose of this site is to try to ascertain as nearly as possible, the original "intent" of particular Biblical passages. If you have an example where the two approaches you mention yield different meanings for the same text, then maybe the question has merit. However, to do this presupposes you know the differences in the approaches, so I'm not sure the question can really be made to fit. — enegue 5 hours ago
Where questions that are valid without a text are being shuttered because they have no text. The site is largely related to the text, but per the topics allowed, some do not need texts, most especially questions related to hermeneutical approaches.
Does anyone else see this trend of rejecting questions because of no text, when really no text is needed?
 
 
2 hours later…
Caleb
Caleb
7:26 PM
@Dɑvïd I'm actually not even planning on using it full page. I need the resolution because I was going to stretch it all the way across the binding. Excuse the VERY rough sketch here I just starting playing with something late last night and have a concept in my head that's only partially sketched out here.
The title is from 1st Corinthians 15:51, I Tell You a Mystery. And since all books should have subtitles, one has been duly logged as "Commentary on the Book of Revelation".
 
Caleb
Caleb
8:05 PM
@ScottS Yes, I've noticed. And objected to it when I've seen it. The rule about having to start from a verse works to keep a certain genre of questions in check, but it's not a magic formula to which all questions in the field of expertise should conform.
 
 
1 hour later…
Dɑvïd
Dɑvïd
9:22 PM
@Caleb SWASH!! :D
Nice concept. Might be tricky to pull off, but I can see much better what sort of manuscript image you need.
@ScottS @Caleb I was going to suggest posing a question on Meta, but we have this covered already, don't we? There's Scott's answer and Susan's question with answers that are relevant. Are there other (better?) ones?
 

« first day (2091 days earlier)      last day (2505 days later) »