[tei-council] reminder

[Lou Burnard]

Gabriel BODARD wrote:
> 
> Depth I like. The other two I'm not sure I can see the difference. 

It's in the remarks at the end

> Height in particular is convoluted, since the description currently 
> doesn't help at all for (e.g.) an altar inscribed on the top. 

For text-bearing objects, I would have thought it helpful to specify
that height is perpendicular to the writing axis but in the same plane, 
rather than along the plane which is perpendicular to the plane of the 
writing axis. But I agree it's hard to express this in a non-convoluted 
way.


In
> 'height' and 'width', do we mean "e.g." instead of "i.e."?

Err, no.

> 
> Anyway, as Sebastian and I discussed earlier in this thread, I think the 
> basic definition of height should be "measurement of the height of a 
> manuscript or object" tout court, with specifics only by way of example 
> (if at all).

So the description should just say "height means height"?

Well I'll have another crack at it... suggestions welcomed!