[tei-council] [Fwd: Re: <note place="foot"/> vs. <note place="bottom"/>]

[David Sewell]

Doing Google searches on

   "note place foot" TEI

and

   "note place bottom" TEI

is instructive.  [95 to 2 for the former.]

I'd say we are outvoted. I think the rationale for "bottom" was symmetry 
with "top" (as a "topnote", if that exists, is something different from 
a "headnote", which appears at the start of a text).

If our documentation for att.placement were free text we could say

     bottom (or foot)
        at the foot of the page

but the suggested value is generated by valItem/@ident, which allows 
only a single token. We could amend the description to read

     bottom
       at the foot of the page (alternatively: <hi rend="bold">foot</hi>)

Or we could go back to "foot", except that we have all those printed 
copies of the Guidelines out there with "bottom".

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009, Paul F. Schaffner wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Mar 2009, Lou Burnard wrote:
>> Council members may like to mull over whether or not we should
>> reconsider @place="foot"... it is actually used passim in the Guidelines
>> source :-(
>
> Just so I'm clear, these are our suggested values, right?
>
> o below (below the line)
> o bottom (at the foot of the page)
> o margin (in the margin (left, right, or both))
> o top (at the top of the page)
> o opposite (on the opposite, i.e. facing, page)
> o overleaf (on the other side of the leaf)
> o above (above the line)
> o end (at the end of e.g. chapter or volume.)
> o inline (within the body of the text.)
> o inspace (in a predefined space)
>
> My questions would be:
>
> -- What exactly is the force of 'suggested'? If it
>    is weak, if the values are merely illustrative,
>    then I do not suppose it matters much what
>    specific terms are suggested.
>
> -- Thinking of the notes I deal with (or avert my
>    gaze from) every day, there are many common
>    @places not included in this list. Aside from
>    foot (and yes, we use 'foot') = at the foot of
>    the page; there are notes at the bottom of other
>    sub-div units, e.g. notes after each stanza
>    of a poem, or after each paragraph; shoulder
>    notes; mixed notes that begin as interlinears
>    and spread down the margin to the foot of the
>    page and then spread across the page; notes
>    placed opposite the text in what amounts to
>    another column of the same table; notes at the
>    end of the div, or of the superordinate div, or
>    of the volume, or the book; notes above the word
>    (as opposed to above the line); etc. Given their
>    infinite variety, how much should we worry
>    about suggesting a few values anyway?
>
> -- Does we make any specific recommendations for
>    distinguishing between multiple note series
>    in the same general location? In the example
>    from the Dunciad, the tagger  distinguished the two sets
>    of footnotes using @type, but is that generalizable?
>    I shouldn't think so; the example might even be
>    misleading in that regard. What does one do when
>    the two series are of essentially the same @type
>    (e.g. 'textual') but nevertheless of distinct series?
>
>    (TCP uses numbers affixed to the @place value, e.g.
>    place="foot1" vs. place="foot2" to distinguish series;
>    this is of course a kludge, like most of what we do!).
>
> -- Do we make any specific recommendations for
>    distinguishing between note series based on
>    the character or rendering of their markers?
>    E.g., an alphabetical series of notes alongside
>    a numeric series vs. an asterisk-flagged series,
>    all in the margin, like in the 1602 Geneva Bible.
>
> -- Do we make any provision for recording the 'running'
>    labels associated with marginal or foot notes.
>    (Again as in the Dunciad example, which uses @type,
>    or frequently found at the head of the margin
>    on every page). Is this an <fw> or something
>    else? (We tend to 'distribute' such labels,
>    rather unhappily, into each note in the series
>    as a <label>: <note place="margin" n="2"><label>
>    Comments.</label> ... </note>).
>
> -- Finally, do we make any specific recommendations
>    for distinguishing more finely between the suggested
>    place values listed? e.g. books that have different
>    sets of notes in the inner and outer margins (or
>    the left and right margins).
>
> There are probably answers to some of these lurking somewhere
> in the documentation, but I suppose my feeling (eager
> as always to be corrected) is that there are so many
> potential complications to the placement of notes, that
> most people dealing with historical materials will have
> to contrive their own customized set of values in any case.
>
> pfs
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Paul Schaffner | PFSchaffner at umich.edu | http://www.umich.edu/~pfs/
> 316-C Hatcher Library N, Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI 48109-1205
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>

-- 
David Sewell, Editorial and Technical Manager
ROTUNDA, The University of Virginia Press
PO Box 801079, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4318 USA
Courier: 310 Old Ivy Way, Suite 302, Charlottesville VA 22903
Email: dsewell at virginia.edu   Tel: +1 434 924 9973
Web: http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/