[tei-council] date-stamping <desc>

James Cummings James.Cummings at oucs.ox.ac.uk
Wed Oct 11 02:01:13 EDT 2006

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> Syd Bauman wrote:
>> Well, I suppose if you have really strict and well-enforced rules on
>> when a version= gets incrememnted, this would work too. The advantage
>> of my translationOfVersion= attribute is that it makes clear that
>> making an improvement to the translation does not mean you change the
>> attribute value; you only change the attribute value when you've
>> changed the content to be a translation of a different source string,
>> albeit perhaps only slightly different.
> yes, I think your argument has some strength. I'd
> be happy to have @version instead of @onDate
> if y'all agree. It would solve my immediate
> problem, and one can't ask for more than that.

Isn't it always going to be the case that the @version on the desc 
with xml:lang='en' will be the base text being translated?  A question 
then is whether all original versions for which there are translated 
equivalents should be present?  I.e. if I have a translation that 
points to version="5" and another that points to version="3" should 
both 3 and 5 versions of the original text still be recorded in the 
file?  What happens when I want to see what my version 3 translation 
is in the original?

Just thinking out loud,

Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford

More information about the tei-council mailing list