[tei-council] P5 internal structure

[Daniel O'Donnell]

I'm in favour of option 2 as well, but agree with Christian that in
principle it doesn't seem to me to involve massive changes from the
current output as it is visible to the user unless we start messing with
the order of the chapters as well... which seems to me to be a different
issue.

The immediate question for the milestone is the part vs./+ chapter
division, not the order of the chapters IMO. Once we know the level
issue, the HTML/PDF output teams can start work on the stylesheets and
design, regardless of the editorial order (which seems to me to be an
editorial issue).

-d

On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 17:39 +0000, Arianna Ciula wrote:
> It is a pity to loose the old chapters references, but if the overall 
> HTML structure can benefit and be improved the modifications are more 
> than welcome.
> 
> Arianna
> 
> Lou Burnard wrote:
> > Sebastian and I were actioned to determine what to do about the 
> > formatting problems in generating HTML from the newly vanilla-div 
> > structured  P5 whilst in Lithuania.
> > 
> > We discussed the following options:
> > 
> > 0. Top level divs are numbered I to VIII; second level divs are numbered 
> > 1 to 39. what is currently the first chapter of part II (numbered 4) 
> > remains numbered 4.
> > 
> > 1. Combine top and subsequent level divs: what is currently the first 
> > chapter of part II (numbered 4) becomes II.1
> > 
> > 2. Forget about the part numbers: what is currently the first chapter of 
> > part II (numbered 4) remains numbered 4.
> > 
> > 3. Special case the first chapter in each part so that it does something 
> > magical to produce an extra blank page, possibly with an extra heading 
> > or something.
> > 
> > We observed that:
> > 
> > (a) the current structure is in need of overhaul -- some of the chapters 
> > are very small and others very large; some closely related material 
> > (e.g. CH and WD) is widely separated; the distinction between "core" and 
> > "additional" tagsets is defunct.
> > 
> > (b) the chapters that define modules should probably be separated from 
> > those which don't, both by numbering and form of title. Some of the 
> > current introductory material could move into the <front>; some of the 
> > current "technical material" could move into the <back>.
> > 
> > We concluded:
> > 
> > We will begin by adopting option 2 above. This is by far the simplest 
> > solution if we want to get out reasonable looking and accessible HTML in 
> > the near future. It also leaves room for us to group and regroup 
> > chapters without major upheaval.
> > 
> > The downside is that those who have got accustomed to thinking of 
> > chapter CH as chapter 4 will have to get reprogrammed. But they have 
> > quite a lot of reprogramming to endure anyway.
> > _______________________________________________
> > tei-council mailing list
> > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
> 
-- 
Daniel Paul O'Donnell, PhD
Director, Digital Medievalist Project http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/
Associate Professor and Chair, Department of English
University of Lethbridge
Lethbridge AB T1K 3M4
Canada
Vox: +1 403 329-2378
Fax: +1 403 382-7191