[tei-council] postscript draft

Syd Bauman Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu
Wed Aug 1 12:05:29 EDT 2007


> I love the examples, and have no objection to including this new
> element.

Excellent, glad to hear it.


> I have a question though: suppose I'd decided to treat the letter
> as a <text> rather than a <div> (not on the face of it a completely
> daft idea), would the postscript then become a <div type="ps"> or
> would it be inside <back> ?

Good question ... since you can't encode it directly in <back>, I
don't think, I think it would be in a <div type="ps">, whether it was
a child of <body> or of <back>. I'm not sure whether we should make a
recommendation of one over the other, though.


> Why not use <postscript> as the name of the tag? We generally do
> use fullnames for these divTop/bot things (e.g. <epigraph> not
> <epigr>)

For reasons stated in the prose, but I am not at all opposed to
<postscript>. I don't think it matters (remember, the gloss does say
"postscript" :-) and think that the only issue that should be driving
this decision is "what do the users want?"; but we haven't time to
poll the membership, so we need to take our best guess.





More information about the tei-council mailing list