[tei-council] Hyphenation discussion

Piotr Bański bansp at o2.pl
Mon Jan 24 16:01:26 EST 2011

I'm not sure how exclusive (c) and (d) are:

I like to have @type ready to use, it seems relatively cheap to have and
very handy sometimes (I yearn for att.typed in gramGrp; gonna pester you
about that some day). But if @type remains, it would be good to have a
tight list for @breaking, to indicate clearly that when someone wants to
say "inWord" (or equivalent), they should go for @breaking, rather than
devise new values for @type. This means (c). I see some possible merits
of (d) and I don't have enough experience to say which of the two works
better on the users. They are not mutually exclusive, are they.

I'd say (c) followed closely by (d). As in: prefer positive, explicit
values to loose, schema-external negative hints for the user (though
there's nothing wrong with having the latter if you also have the
former, it seems to me).



On 2011-01-23 17:04, Lou Burnard wrote:
> I suppose it's a hopeless task to get closure on hyphenation (ha ha), 
> but let's try anyway.
> Apart from adding the explanatory text which I circulated previously, 
> modulo the changes already proposed, I think the options are as follows:
> a) add to 3.2 the text circulated previously , and add some more 
> suggested values to the @type attribute, but make it (even more) 
> explicit that these are just suggestions for how you might use that 
> attribute
> b) ditto, but make the list tighter and remove redundancy from it (i.e. 
> either inWord or noBreak but not both)
> c) leave @type alone, but add a new explicit @breaking attribute with 
> three possible values
> d) leave @type alone, add new @breaking attribute, add a comment that 
> you shouldn't use @type to do the job of @breaking (or indeed of @ed)
> e) add @breaking, remove @type
> Can we have a quick show of hands from ALL council members on which of 
> these options they would most/least like to live with?
> P.S.
> I persist in thinking that the @cert issue is different -- if we apply 
> @cert to an <lb/> we are saying something about how certain we are that 
> there is a line (or whatever) beginning here. I find it hard to imagine 
> a case in which this is meaningful -- we're not talking about whether or 
> not the line of our transcription always began here (if we think it 
> didn't, we'd put in a <gap/> which could then have @cert)  but whether 
> it does in the document/object we're transcribing. But, as I say, in any 
> case it's a different question, so please don't comment on that in 
> response to this messsage!
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived

More information about the tei-council mailing list