[tei-council] NH final but typos
Syd Bauman
Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu
Sun Oct 28 18:04:56 EST 2007
> Changed to "their"
Oy vey!
> > * #NHME, 4th <egXML>:
> > What are the intervening <p> elements for? Why not just
> > <egXML xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/Examples" corresp="#NH-eg-02">
> > <p>
> > <s>Catholic woman of twenty-seven with five children And a body
> > first-ratepointed her finger at the back of one certain man and
> > asked me, "Is that guy a psychiatrist?" and by god he was!</s>
> > <s>"Yes," She said, "He <emph>looks</emph> like a psychiatrist."</s>
> > <s>Grown quiet, I looked at his pink back, and thought.</s>
> > </p>
> > </egXML>
> Also a plausible encoding but presumably not close to the original,
> and in any case notas good for the pedagogic reasons that this
> passage was chosen in the first place.
Well, presuming Dan's quoting of the original is pretty reasonable
earlier in the chapter, I don't see a single paragraph is further
from the original then 3 of them. It's not as though the paragraphs
are aligned with the line breaks -- they just wrap the sentences.
> This is something we disagree on, fairly fundamentally, so I am not
> going to comment further. In any case, we don't have time to make
> further substantive revisions in this version.
OK, no need to comment. We can argue about whether or not <milestone>
should be (ab)used as a segment boundary delimiter for P5. In the
meantime, you can eliminate the confusing implicating easily, as
noted previously: insert a <div> with an xml:id="NHTM", move the two
paras indicated into it, add the <head>, delete the "also", and
presto!
> There are quite a few places in the Glines where we do exactly like
> that.
1) Not quite -- the GLs (so far) use <anchor> to denote 1 end of a
range, not both
2) I don't really like it for that, either.
> I don't known what the <choice> is doing there either so I killed
> it.
There are 2 other <choice> elements in the entire Guidelines, and
they are both in this chapter.
> The <q> should be a <mentioned> in my view.
We should discuss the philosophy of if & when a quotation is ever
used, as opposed to just being mentioned, over a mug of Orangina
sometime.
> > * #NHVE, first 2 <egXML>s: I am uncomfortable with implying that it
> > is OK or good to be reconstituting partial elements by co-indexing
> > n=. We have an attribute for the simple case, part=; we have
> > attributes for the complicated case: next= and prev= (shown in next
> > xmp); we have at least 2 out-of-line methods (<join> and stand-off
> > w/ <xi:include>). Why are we introducing another, demonstrably
> > problematic method? I realize we discuss the problems, but this
> > abuse of n= rubs me the wrong way, anyhow.
> >
> where on earth did that suggestion come from? it strikes me as
> pretty weird!
To which suggestion are you referring?
> > * "In as much as it uses elements not included in the TEI namespace,
> > stand-off markup involves an extension of the TEI." This is false
> > on 2 grounds: ...
> I think it needs to be clearer that standoff per se is not an extension
> (it can't be since there are other bits of TEI which exemplify it).
> However, it is now definitely pumpkin time for this cinderella of a
> chapter...
Just delete the entire paragraph! It's only got 1 sentence, and it's
a false one.
More information about the tei-council
mailing list