A few years back, I ran into a family friend who was all excited about a law a politician he personally knew was trying to pass. The law would require all cell phone makers to use a standardized plug so that no matter where you were, you could plug into someone else’s cable and charge your phone. I told him it was a horrible idea. He asked why. I told him that besides stifling innovation by requiring electronics to use one specific technology that would one day be obsolete, more importantly, those cables were not the same. And I went on to explain the differences (this link is an equivalent summary of what I told him).
The titles produced for Accordance are not ebooks. They’re not simple electronic versions of print books. Converting an Accordance title to Logos, BibleWorks, Wordsearch and back is not like converting a word processing document back and forth between Word, Pages, NotaBene, Mellel, etc. where the most important factor is to make certain that the same content can be viewed in any of those word processors. I would suggest that Accordance developers are more detailed-oriented than any other platform when it comes to identifying different kinds of text as well as hyperlinking to other resources. Simple comparisons with our competition speak for themselves. But this kind of detail that our developers add to a title means that it can’t simply be swapped back and forth, even if we did all agree on an interchangeable format. It’s just not going to work. And we continue to improve to our format, such as with the embedded charts in our genealogy module. Having a standard format that’s interchangeable would stifle improving upon formats that already exist. I realize that this kind of innovation is not important to everyone. Some folks just want to read the content. If that’s the case, Kindle versions, which are often cheaper, are adequate. Accordance allows you to do so much more, though.
NOTA BENE??? ANYONE STILL USE THAT? I did back with DOS 3.3.