[tei-council] Proposal <idno> coverage -SF 2493417

Laurent Romary laurent.romary at loria.fr
Sat Jan 24 14:26:09 EST 2009


After some thoughts, I would definitely favour this. It worries me  
that we should have separate elements for expressing the same thing,  
just because the encompassing structure imposes separate constraints.  
So yes, we need alternate content models.

Le 24 janv. 09 à 18:52, Sebastian Rahtz a écrit :

> Although it raises a whole slew of issues about how to
> implement it, are we saying that elements found
> within <bibl> should have different behaviour from those
> same elements inside <biblStruct>? ie make clear
> the transcription vs database modalities by variant
> content models, rather than different elements?
>
> -- 
> Sebastian Rahtz
> Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services
> 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
>
> Sólo le pido a Dios
> que el futuro no me sea indiferente
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council



More information about the tei-council mailing list