[tei-council] Fwd: [ tei-Bugs-2900430 ] data type of @scribe and @script

Laurent Romary laurent.romary at inria.fr
Sat Aug 21 02:00:19 EDT 2010


Hi all,
We get a lot of spam on SF. Would it not be possible to restrict  
writing to registered users?
Laurent

Début du message réexpédié :

> De : "SourceForge.net" <noreply at sourceforge.net>
> Date : 21 août 2010 02:55:33 GMT+02:00
> À : Laurent.Romary at loria.fr
> Objet : [ tei-Bugs-2900430 ] data type of @scribe and @script
>
> Bugs item #2900430, was opened at 2009-11-19 12:57
> Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nobody
> You can respond by visiting:
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=644062&aid=2900430&group_id=106328
>
> Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the  
> comment thread,
> including the initial issue submission, for this request,
> not just the latest update.
> Category: TEI: Definition of Elements/Attributes/Classes
> Group: AMBER
> Status: Open
> Resolution: None
> Priority: 5
> Private: No
> Submitted By: Torsten Schassan (schassan)
> Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
> Summary: data type of @scribe and @script
>
> Initial Comment:
> Shouldn't the data type of @scribe and @script be data.pointer  
> rather than data.name? I would expect an explanation (i.e.  
> biographical details about the scribe, or characteristics of the  
> script) somewhere else if these attributes are filled. Thus, the  
> value of the attribute would be a pointer instead of just a name of  
> something? Especially as the description of @scribe states, that it  
> "gives a standard name or other identifier" (!).
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
> Date: 2010-08-21 00:55
>
> Message:
> 4TLcxZ  <a href="http://pzchoiejnczq.com/">pzchoiejnczq</a>,
> [url=http://lczryxcibjpc.com/]lczryxcibjpc[/url],
> [link=http://pqkpaktsweml.com/]pqkpaktsweml[/link],
> http://mjcfjbvsnkcp.com/
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment By: Dot Porter (dot_porter)
> Date: 2010-04-30 13:10
>
> Message:
> the new <scriptNote>/<scriptDesc> should be considered parallel to
> <typeNote>/<typeDesc>
> (http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref- 
> typeDesc.html and
> http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-typeNote.html)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment By: Lou Burnard (louburnard)
> Date: 2010-04-30 12:47
>
> Message:
> Nowhere to define a script; need to point to scribe and to script,  
> both
> distinct. Not the same as hand. Need to decide on referring policy.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment By: Elena Pierazzo (epierazzo)
> Date: 2009-12-06 16:49
>
> Message:
> No to <handNote>, which describe the type of hand, but to something  
> like
> <scriptNote> that describe the kind of script. For instance you want  
> to say
> that the type of script is used mainly for the production of books  
> or for
> charters; that was used mostly in a particular area/scriptorium, and  
> in a
> particular date range. You can also say that the script is  
> characterised by
> a particular shape of a given letter etc.
> Into a <handNote> you will perhaps say that this particular scribe  
> uses
> the script in a personal way, with log-short descendant, using a pen  
> which
> is cut in a different way, using an ink of a given colour, etc.
> Make sense?
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment By: Lou Burnard (louburnard)
> Date: 2009-12-06 16:39
>
> Message:
> Presumably if @scribe (or @scribeRef) is a pointer it should point  
> to a
> <person> and @script or @scriptRef should point to a <handNote>?
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment By: Elena Pierazzo (epierazzo)
> Date: 2009-12-01 18:03
>
> Message:
> I agree Torsten you but I also see Lou's point about retro- 
> compatibility.
> Perhaps we should add @scriptRef as pointer (as we did for <w> which  
> has
> now @lemma and @lemmaRef for this very reason) and leave @script as  
> it is.
> We definitely need a way to describe scripts properly!
> Once we have done it, I think we have also to add something similar to
> <handNotes> in the <profileDesc> in order to describe a script  
> properly.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment By: Lou Burnard (louburnard)
> Date: 2009-11-20 15:53
>
> Message:
> I can see why you might want this for @scribe, assuming you know  
> more about
> the scribe than their conventional name (though how often is that the
> case?), but what element would @script point to? For most usages these
> attributes are  just a convenient way of normalising references  (like
> @key) rather than requiring the stricter kind of validation which  
> @ref or
> your proposal would permit-- or rather, require. This change would  
> thus
> break a lot of existing documents.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> You can respond by visiting:
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=644062&aid=2900430&group_id=106328

Laurent Romary
INRIA & HUB-IDSL
laurent.romary at inria.fr





More information about the tei-council mailing list