[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