[tei-council] certainty revised

[Lou Burnard]

Martin Holmes wrote:

> --------------------
> 
> The current documentation for <certainty> 
> (<http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-certainty.html>) 
> includes an example based on:
> 
> Ernest went to <anchor xml:id="A1"/> old
> <persName xml:id="SYB">Saybrook</persName>.
> 
> and it says "For discussion of this example, see section 21.1.2 
> Structured Indications of Uncertainty", but the example discussed in 
> 21.1.2 is now the much better (IMHO) example of Elizabeth and Essex.
> 

Fixed xref; thanks!


> --------------------
> 
> The example of the abbreviation expansion of SGML looks like this:
> 
> You will want to use
> <choice>
>   <expan xml:id="CE-e1">Standard
>     Generalized Markup Language</expan>
>   <expan xml:id="CE-e40">Some Grandiose Methodology for Losers</expan>
>   <abbr>SGML</abbr>
> </choice> ...
> 
> <!-- ... -->
> <certainty target="#CE-e1" locus="value" degree="0.9"/>
> <certainty target="#CE-e40" locus="value" degree="0.5"/>
> 
> I suspect that the second @degree value should be "0.1", shouldn't it? 
> Don't the two have to add up to 1?
> 

Um, no I don't think so. They are independent probabilities, I think. 
Unless @given is used, of course.



> ---------------------
> 
> Finally, I find myself a little puzzled by the application of 
> <precision> to @notAfter, @notBefore, etc. My habit in using these 
> attributes has been to decide once and for all, based on known 
> information and logical deduction, what the _actual_ earliest and latest 
> possible dates would be. It seems a little odd to me to say that 
> something is "not after 1857", but there's a 50% chance that it might 
> be. If you're not sure it's @notAfter="1857", then you need to move your 
> @notAfter value forward until you can be sure, don't you?

That would seem like a sensible practoce to me too. I observe only that 
people like to be more nuanced (or vague) sometimes.


In my
> experience, there always _is_ a genuine value for @notBefore or 
> @notAfter -- in the case of an action by a person, for instance, the 
> date before which they were definitely not born, the date after which 
> they were definitely dead, or the point at which they would have been so 
> old as to break all known longevity records. After all, @notAfter is 
> defined as specifying "the latest possible date".
> 

yes, but....

> One example from the text:
> 
> <residence from="1857-03-01" notAfter="1857-04-30">From the 1st of March to
> some time in April of 1857.
> <precision match="@notAfter" degree="0.5"/>
> </residence>
> 
> Now, if "some time in April" is true, then @degree should surely be 
> "1.0". 

No, the precision implies only to the @notAfter value


If "some time in April" is doubtful, then surely so is "the 1st
> of March". 

Why? You might have documentary evidence for the 1st of March, for example.

But if there is doubt, that doubt presumably originates in
> external evidence, which ought at least to be adduced, and which itself 
> would presumably give a more realistic value for @notAfter.
> 

Or it might not!

I think this example is quite plausible as it stands, but would you find 
it more convincing if the @notAfter were replaced by a @to ?