[tei-council] handy...

[Christian Wittern]

Lou Burnard wrote:
>
> If you've forgotten, the only difference between <hand> and <handNote> 
> is that the former is empty, while the latter has para content. And 
> <hand> has attributes
>   @scribe,    @style   @ink  @first  @writing   @mainLang  @resp
> while
> <handNote> has attributes
>  @scribe
>  @script  [means same as hand at style]
>  @medium [means same as hand at ink]
>  @scope  [generalizes on hand at first]
>
> Arianna proposes making a new class, att.handWriting, to contain these 
> four, which seems useful, even if we abolish <hand>, since those who 
> want to can then extend it.
>
> The three attributes on <hand> but not <handNote> are probably 
> dispensable: @writing "describes other characteristics of the hand" e,g, 
> "shaky", "thick",. There seems no advantage to giving such descriptive 
> notes in an attribute. @mainLang is not a property of the hand. @resp 
> could be inherited from att.editLike, if needed, but it seems odd to 
> single out identification of the hand from other aspects of ms 
> description. I think these attributes are there because <hand> is empty, 
> so there was a need to pack a lot of extra info into it. If we replaced 
> <hand> by <handNote>, then any such extra info could appear as content 
> of the element.
>
>
>   
 From this description, I would say it makes sense to me.  On the other 
hand, I am not encoding manuscripts, so can not really judge the 
usefulness.  I would say go ahead anyway, even if we might have to 
revisit this in more detail for 1.1.

Christian



-- 

 Christian Wittern 
 Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN