[tei-council] GREENies

[Lou Burnard]

Peter Boot wrote:
> Lou Burnard schreef:
>> 2494567 (add language documenting use of range() in preference to use of 
>> @targetEnd, deprecating the latter)
> 
> range() as the recommended way of doing things is OK, but deprecating
> @targetEnd seems too early (while there is no software that exploits the
> xpointer schemes).
> 

Fair enough. Though there isn't much software that exploits targetEnd 
either, of course.

>> 2242044 (introduce new <locusGrp> element)
> 
> The definition of locus says ‘usually as a (possibly discontinuous)
> sequence of folio references.’ The text of the Guidelines repeats this:
> ‘Locations are conventionally specified as a sequence of folio or page
> numbers, but may also be a discontinuous list, or a combination of the
> two.’
> 
> The example that Thorsten gives ‘Bl. 13--26, 37--58, 82--96’ could
> therefore be encoded as <locus>Bl. 13--26, 37--58, 82—96</locus>
> 
> So why do we need a locusGrp? Will we then also recommend not to use
> discontinuous loci? Will we provide guidance on when to use one locus, 
> when multiple?
> 
> I’m not against introducing the element but I would like to see 
> something more specific before assenting to this one.
> 

Yes, I made the same point to Thorsten in discussion (or maybe not to 
him). I think the argument was just that some people do want to 
introduce some structure into the list. So that, for example, you can 
put pointers to page images on the relevant <locus>es. I don't think 
there is any suggestion that locuses cannot be discontinuous -- that 
would be silly. And I suppose the guidance would just be that you should 
be consistent.


But I'm happy to reclassify this one as AMBER, and rescind the 
deprecation of targetEnd (personally, I think targetEnd is lovely)