[tei-council] <foliation> in MS

[Laurent Romary]

I think we do need a feature request entry in any case.
Oxford?
Laurent

Le 3 juil. 08 à 15:44, James Cummings a écrit :

> David Sewell wrote:
>> it is clear that there *should* be more than one <foliation> in some
>> cases, so that at least needs to be reflected in the content model of
>> <supportDesc>.  So I'd vote to change.
>>
>> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>>
>>> I'd really quite like to make <foliation> repeatable, as that
>>> seems to be the intention of the prose about it. Does the Council
>>> authorize such a last-minute change?
>
> I'd also agree that this should be repeatable.
>
> I'd also want to suggest that we re-examine the issue of how strict  
> some
> of the content models are in the msDesc model at some point in the
> future.  It isn't that I don't think that this is useful, but some of
> them (as with foliation) have the real potential to be repeatable.   
> This
> seems to be exactly the kind of situation where there is a  
> customisation
> use-case.  Let's pretend that all of the supportDesc children (erm,
> support, extent, collation, condition, and of course foliation... from
> memory) were repeatable and allowable in any order.  A good example
> customisation might be to specify some of these not to be repeatable,
> and to only allow them in a specific order.  (i.e. to recreate what  
> the
> TEI currently has.)
>
> But for now, just allowing foliation to be repeatable I can see as a
> corrigible bug since, as David points out, the prose seems to indicate
> it should be.
>
> -James
>
> -- 
> Dr James Cummings, Research Technologies Service, University of Oxford
> James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council