[tei-council] Fwd: biblStruct replaced by biblItem in P5?

[John A. Walsh]

Hi All,

I know the biblStruct/biblItem has been floating around for a while,  
and I can't recall the status, but I'd like to suggest this issue as  
a useful agenda item for our Kyoto meeting, if we think, based on  
prior discussions, we could resolve it in fairly short order.

My position is that biblStruct is adequate for TEI and if folks want  
to build fuller bibliographic data sets in XML there are other  
standards, e.g., MODS, that are well-suited to that task.

John
--
| John A. Walsh
| Associate Director for Projects and Services, Digital Library Program
| Associate Librarian, University Libraries
| Adjunct Associate Professor, Department of English
| Indiana University, 1320 East Tenth Street, Bloomington, IN 47405
| Voice:812-855-8758 Fax:812-856-2062 <mailto:jawalsh at indiana.edu>



Begin forwarded message:

> From: Martin Holmes <mholmes at UVIC.CA>
> Date: April 26, 2006 8:11:40 AM EDT
> To: TEI-L at LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU
> Subject: Re: biblStruct replaced by biblItem in P5?
> Reply-To: Martin Holmes <mholmes at UVIC.CA>
>
> I wasn't aware of this. I use biblStruct a lot in P4, and I'd like  
> to retain it in P5 unless biblItem is essentially doing the same  
> job with the same structure. I have a lot of code invested in  
> turning biblStructs into MLA-style references in PDF and XHTML. I  
> really wouldn't want to be rewriting that if I could avoid it.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> Peter Boot wrote:
>> The current state of P5 includes both biblItem and biblStruct (and  
>> its
>> children analytic, monogr and series). I don't think the  
>> documentation
>> says anything about biblStruct and its children being on the way  
>> out. In
>> the discussion on TEI-L in 2004, however, biblItem was introduced  
>> as a
>> possible replacement for biblStruct, rather than as a new element.
>> François asked about the need to remove the 'old' biblStruct, to  
>> which Lou
>> replied: 'Not if there is a vocal cry for its retention'.
>> I myself seem to have been to only one to have said (on this list)  
>> that
>> biblStruct should be retained. I wouldn't especially like having  
>> to go
>> back to the people I explained the biblStructs to and tell them we're
>> going to do it differently from now on. It's hard enough to win  
>> people
>> over to text encoding without this type of change.
>> So what is the current status on this? Has it been decided to remove
>> biblStruct in P5?
>> Peter