[tei-council] date attributes: summary, problems, and some suggestions

Dot Porter dporter at uky.edu
Sun Feb 18 14:55:16 EST 2007


I agree with James that <distance> should be kept for spacial
difference and not considered only in a discussion of date/time.

Dot

On 2/18/07, James Cummings
<James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> wrote:
> Syd Bauman wrote:
> >>>   - If we keep <distance>[1] we may wish to reconsider its class
> >>>     membership, as value= is a bit silly on <distance>. It needs only
> >>>     dur= from att.datePart, making two cases that benefit from
> >>>     splitting att.datePart. (See <docDate>, above.)
> >
> >> kill distance
> >
> > Is anyone in favor of keeping <distance>? Is anyone besides me, Lou,
> > and Sebastian in favor of deleting it?
>
> As I stated on 2007-02-05, I am in favour of keeping distance because it is
> useful for spatial distance.  I don't mind if temporal distance is removed from
> it, but as an element it should be considered completely separately from the
> discussion of date/times.
>
> -james
>
> --
> Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford
> James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>


-- 
***************************************
Dot Porter, University of Kentucky
#####
Program Coordinator
Collaboratory for Research in Computing for Humanities
dporter at uky.edu          859-257-9549
#####
Editorial Assistant, REVEAL Project
Center for Visualization and Virtual Environments
porter at vis.uky.edu
***************************************



More information about the tei-council mailing list