[tei-council] death of <*Struct>: pending problems & suggested solutions

James Cummings James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk
Wed Aug 23 05:11:47 EDT 2006

Syd Bauman wrote:
> Ranges
> ------
> Problem: We need to think through <dateRange> and <timeRange> with
>          respect to data.duration, ISO 8601 range formats, and
>          notBefore= & notAfter=.

I have no problem with using the ISO 8601 range formats.  On dateRange and
timeRange are @notBefore and @notAfter replacing @from and @to?  I.e. I'm
assuming if we just end up with date/time that there won't be a @from and @to?

> Proposal: * delete <dateRange> and <timeRange>
>           * add <date> and <time> to att.datable (thus they get
>             notBefore= and notAfter=)
>           * alter att.datePart so that rather than having
>             attribute value { data.temporal | data.duration }
>             it defines two attributes
>             attribute value { data.temporal }
>             attribute dur { data.duration }
>           * add Schematron rule to <date> and <time> that insists
>             that either ( value= and/or dur= ) OR ( notBefore= and/or
>             notAfter= ) is present, but not both
>           ALTERNATIVE: 
>           Rather than having a Schematron rule, could plop all four
>           attributes into alternate pairs in a single class. At least
>           I think this is supposed to work, but at the moment it
>           generates an invalid schema. (I've sent Sebastian separate
>           mail.) 

If this can be done without a schematron rule, then that is certainly better.
Although I'm slightly torn about it, I think getting rid of dateRange/timeRange
in favour of having just having the ability to indicate this on date/time is a
beneficial step.


More information about the tei-council mailing list