Daniel Paul O'Donnell
daniel.odonnell at gmail.com
Fri Jul 10 10:38:54 EDT 2009
Thanks David, this is touching on exactly the question I've been trying
to ask: how would i18n translations of the TEI handle the elements they
*don't* translate. You are assuming the solution would be like tite (two
namespaces). But is it wrong to copy the non-translated ones to the same
namespace as the corrected ones?
I can see the problem--it implies that the non-translated ones are not
the same as the canonical elements in the main TEI namespace and that
this might encourage diversion over time. But I can also see people
finding it confusing to use two names spaces from what is (from a human
perspective) "really" an attempt at a single, albeit (partially)
localised, TEI encoded document.
Moreover, if an element in a localisation is left with the same name as
the canonical element, it may be simply because the same name works in
the localiser's language as well: if I rename tei:choice to tei-fr:choix
because choix is French for choice, but leave tei:biblStruct the way it
is because that also works in French (maybe better even than in
English), is it really true to say that this is tei:biblStruct rather
Anyway, this may really be theology, since we have a working model for
Tite, and in the Tite context this confusion shouldn't arise since we
are treating it like a tool to be used by accomplished encoders--and
emphasising that it shouldn't be used for archiving.
We should probably make sure that the documentation says this before the
benefit (assuming it works out) is announced in November.
David Sewell wrote:
> I don't think it is a problem in the context of Tite. But the question
> was about internationalization. Suppose you have a French customization
> where roughly half of the standard TEI elements are renamed, e.g.:
> add -> ajout
> del -> supp
> choice -> choix
> and you are then editing a file that looks like this:
> <p>Qui a picqué <choix><supp>la plume</supp><ajout>le
> bic</ajout></choix> de ma <rs key="001">tante</rs>?</p>
> <p> and <rs> are in the TEI namespace, the others in the French
> namespace. But this is not evident from the local context. Is that bad?
> For a newcomer to TEI, it could certainly be a source of confusion.
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2009, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>> David Sewell wrote:
>>> so a human editor of a file,
>>> pre-processing, has no way to know which elements pick up their
>>> namespacing from the DTD without looking at the DTD. Hence it may be
>>> unclear which elements are canonical TEI elements and which are renamed
>>> or otherwise custom elements. Whether or not this is truly a "problem"
>>> depends on the context, I suppose.
>> I really can't see this as problem. why is this human editor and why does she
>> whether elements are canonical or not in Tite? the end user editor will have
>> had it
>> translated to real TEI, and the digitizing editor doesnt care.
Daniel Paul O'Donnell
Associate Professor of English
University of Lethbridge
Chair and CEO, Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org/)
Co-Chair, Digital Initiatives Advisory Board, Medieval Academy of America
President-elect (English), Society for Digital Humanities/Société pour l'étude des médias interactifs (http://sdh-semi.org/)
Founding Director (2003-2009), Digital Medievalist Project (http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/)
Vox: +1 403 329-2377
Fax: +1 403 382-7191 (non-confidental)
Home Page: http://people.uleth.ca/~daniel.odonnell/
More information about the tei-council