[tei-council] date-stamping <desc>
James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk
Mon Oct 9 11:15:33 EDT 2006
Syd Bauman wrote:
> So I'm beginning to think that what we want is not a date-stamp, but
> rather a version number for each canonical <desc>, and a version
> number reference for each translated <desc>. Would that do?
> <desc xml:lang="en" version="2">Fooble fibble</desc>
> <desc xml:lang="zh-tw" translationOfVersion="1">...</desc>
> Of course, if the version number were in a format like 2006-10-09,
> then there's not much difference from a date stamp. So it's the
> criteria for incrementing a version number (or date stamp) that is
> important, probably.
Why do these have to be separate attributes? Why not just:
<desc xml:lang="en" version="2">Fooble fibble</desc>
<desc xml:lang="zh-tw" version="1">...</desc>
<desc xml:lang="fr" version="2">...</desc>
Just wondering what this really buys you?
Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford
James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk
More information about the tei-council