[tei-council] date-stamping <desc>

James Cummings 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?

-James
-- 
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 mailing list