[tei-council] inconsistent relations

Lou's Laptop lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk
Fri Jun 16 11:17:08 EDT 2006

The element <relation> has three attributes active, passive, and mutual. 
Mutual is used to say whether or not the relationship obtains equally 
between the participant. When it does not (i.e. the relationship is a 
directed one such as "employer" --  i.e. employer(A,B) is not the same 
as employer (B,A) -- ) then "active" specifies the active participants, 
and "passive" the passive ones. When it does, however, "active" and 
"passive" have no meaning, yet both are mandatory.

Discussing this, Matthew D and I have come up with the following 
solution, which we propose to integrate into the new personographic section:

a. Either "active" or "mutual" must be supplied
b. if active is supplied, then passive must be supplied as well; 
otherwise, not
c. mutual specifies a list of participant ids in the same way as the 
other two

We can enforce (a) and (c) in RelaxNG; (b) requires a schematron rule.

The only alternative solution we have identified would be to define two 
different elements for mutual and non-mutual relations.

Is council broadly in agreement with this approach?

More information about the tei-council mailing list