[tei-council] reminder

[Sebastian Rahtz]

Gabriel BODARD wrote:

> 
> I'm pretty sure that's not the way archaeologists work, though. The 
> "front" of an object is the face most commonly presented to the 
> viewer/user/celebrant/dedicant/visitor (the door to a temple or tomb, 
> say), but this is not necessarily the face bearing text--and certainly 
> not the only face bearing text. We have at least one object inscribed on 
> eight different faces.

yes, but thats not the point. if there is a "natural" view,
we measure from there. otherwise we choose a viewpoint. generally
speaking, its the same view we do a picture of, or a drawing.

when I used to describe objects, I just said they were (eg)
71cm x 67cm x 21cm, I didnt commit myself to emotive ideas
like "width" and "depth" :-}


> Height, in any case, is pretty unambiguous, and doesn't depend on viewer 
> position or location of text.
ah, you reckon? what is the height of a nail, then? or a spoon?

> I think we're just shooting ourselves in 
> the foot by trying to define what are actually pretty well-understood 
> terms: why don't we just say "the height, width, depth (etc.)" and let 
> users figure out what they mean? 
I'd agree with that

> 
> Because I don't much like (and others even less so) having these 
> spurious --and meaningless-- numbers in my XML in the first place.

treat them like tokens, like 0 and 1 for sex. they make
it unambiguous that your terms are a progression.

> know people who would flat out refuse to use them.   @cert=low means the
> editor wants you to know she has less certainty than usual in the 
> statement of this fact (or interpretation, or supplement). 
> @precision=low means this is _circa_ 12 cm not precisely 12 cm.

use "low" as an <altIdent> for the value "0.25"....


-- 
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