[tei-council] tei.bibl.phrase

Lou Burnard lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk
Sat Oct 1 13:24:52 EDT 2005


No, I've got it now!

tei.phrase.bibl is needed: it should be a subclass of  tei.biblPart. It 
contains those elements which are members of tei.phrase (indirectly) and 
not currently members of tei.biblPart.  Once it exists we can rewrite 
the content of bibl as tei.biblPart*, thus removing all sorts of silly 
phrase elements from bibl.

james's notes make this a lot clearer than either mine or syd's...



Lou Burnard wrote:

> Syd Bauman wrote:
>
>> | * new class, tei.biblPhrases containing <title>, <date>,
>> |   <dateRange>, and <author>, i.e. things that are members of both
>> |   tei.phrase and tei.biblPart, such that the new class will be a
>> |   subclass of each.
>> | | Can someone explain this? Both my notes and JC's notes say this,
>> | but it doesn't make sense to me.<title>, <date>, <dateRange>, and
>> | <author> are not part of tei.phrase at least not directly (and
>> | <author> not at all). Nor are they part of tei.biblPart.
>>
>>  
>>
>>> <title> etc. are all members of phrase indirectly -- <title> via 
>>> hqhrase, <date> and <dateRange> via tei.data. <author> is a member 
>>> of tei.biblPart.
>>>   
>>
>>
>> Right, so none of the elements mentioned are in fact in both classes.
>> Are there any elements that are a member of both? I don't think we
>> have the right criteria for the members of this new class, here.
>>  
>>
>
> I agree. I think what we wanted to do was identify a new sub-class of 
> phrase containing the components of <bibl> which were not already 
> members of tei.biblPart, factoring them out of the definition of 
> phrase in the process.  <author> doesnt belong in the list at all, 
> since it's a member of tei.biblPart.
>
> The issue now becomes whether a reference to tei.phrase.bibl  would 
> make sense wherever we currently have a reference to either 
> tei.hqphrase or tei.data
>
> If it wouldnt, and if we want to retain those class memberships for 
> <title>, <date>, <dateRange> then there is no point in defining this 
> new class.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
>




More information about the tei-council mailing list