[tei-council] name type

[Lou Burnard]

Thank you Matthew for the calm voice of reason, as ever!

Matthew James Driscoll wrote:
> Well, there is something called a "personal name", which is a type of name,
> so I don't really see anything wrong with <name type="person"> (=
> <persName>), although <name type="personal"> would perhaps be better; better
> still, if one wanted to go that road, would be <name type="proper"
> subtype="personal">. I note that @role has gone, which is a relief.
>
> Matthew
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lou Burnard [mailto:lou.burnard at oucs.ox.ac.uk] 
> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 11:50 PM
> To: TEI Council
> Subject: [tei-council] name type
>
> I suppose it would be madness to do anything about it now, but I would 
> like to record  disapproval for the way the Guidelines currently endorse 
> the use of the @type attribute on <name> to record the type of the 
> name's referent rather than the type of name: <name type="person"> 
> rather than <name type="mellifluous"> for example. I am not saying it 
> isn't useful to record the type of thing being named -- clearly it is -- 
> just that I wish we had thought to use a different attribute for the 
> purpose, since everywhere else @type definitely classifies the element 
> itself. Oh well.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>