[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.
-James
More information about the tei-council
mailing list