[tei-council] model.respLike. was: Taking another ticket (2976715)
Martin Holmes
mholmes at uvic.ca
Thu Apr 21 13:22:13 EDT 2011
On 11-04-21 09:02 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
> Thanks for looking at this so carefully Martin. I think I'd originally
> only been thinking about replacing explicit references within<bibl>,
> not in<biblStruct>'s children -- I didnt look closely enough at the
> ticket.
>
> I feel rather uneasy about loosening the content model of<monogr> and
> <series>. These have been quite constrained ever since they were
> invented, and this seems a retrograde step which can only cause confusion.
In that case, I'll simply take the first step (adding <distributor> to
model.respLike), and add a comment on the ticket to the effect that the
second step is deemed to be rather problematic, and needs further
discussion.
Cheers,
Martin
> Since On 21/04/11 16:51, Martin Holmes wrote:
>> I'm now implementing this, and there are a couple of issues in the
>> second part of the recommendation that need some discussion, I think:
>>
>> > 2. Replace explicit references to author | editor | respStmt in the
>> > content model of biblStruct with a reference to the model.respLike
>> > class, so that<distributor>,<funder>,<sponsor> and<principal> are
>> > available where<author>,<editor> and<respStmt> currently are.
>>
>> By<biblStruct>, we really mean<analytic>,<monogr> and<series>.
>> <analytic> is straightforward; we simply replace this:
>>
>> <rng:ref name="author"/>
>> <rng:ref name="editor"/>
>> <rng:ref name="respStmt"/>
>>
>> with this:
>>
>> <rng:ref name="model.respLike"/>
>>
>> in the existing content model:
>>
>> <content>
>> <rng:zeroOrMore xmlns:rng="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0">
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:ref name="author"/>
>> <rng:ref name="editor"/>
>> <rng:ref name="respStmt"/>
>> <rng:ref name="title"/>
>> <rng:ref name="ref"/>
>> <rng:ref name="date"/>
>> </rng:choice>
>> </rng:zeroOrMore>
>> </content>
>>
>> <series> is slightly more complicated, in that it has this for its
>> content model:
>>
>> <content>
>> <rng:zeroOrMore xmlns:rng="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0">
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:text/>
>> <rng:ref name="model.gLike"/>
>> <rng:ref name="title"/>
>> <rng:ref name="ref"/>
>> <rng:ref name="editor"/>
>> <rng:ref name="respStmt"/>
>> <rng:ref name="biblScope"/>
>> <rng:ref name="model.global"/>
>> </rng:choice>
>> </rng:zeroOrMore>
>> </content>
>>
>> <author> is not there, of course; replacing<editor> and<respStmt> with
>> model.respLike would have the side-effect of adding<author> as well as
>> the other intended items (<sponsor> etc.).
>>
>> <monogr> is the most complicated of all. Here we have a rather
>> rigidly-controlled sequence and structure for the content model:
>>
>> <content>
>> <rng:group xmlns:rng="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0">
>> <rng:optional>
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:group>
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:ref name="author"/>
>> <rng:ref name="editor"/>
>> <rng:ref name="respStmt"/>
>> </rng:choice>
>> <rng:zeroOrMore>
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:ref name="author"/>
>> <rng:ref name="editor"/>
>> <rng:ref name="respStmt"/>
>> </rng:choice>
>> </rng:zeroOrMore>
>> <rng:oneOrMore>
>> <rng:ref name="title"/>
>> </rng:oneOrMore>
>> <rng:zeroOrMore>
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:ref name="idno"/>
>> <rng:ref name="editor"/>
>> <rng:ref name="respStmt"/>
>> </rng:choice>
>> </rng:zeroOrMore>
>> </rng:group>
>> <rng:group>
>> <rng:oneOrMore>
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:ref name="title"/>
>> <rng:ref name="ref"/>
>> </rng:choice>
>> </rng:oneOrMore>
>> <rng:zeroOrMore>
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:ref name="idno"/>
>> <rng:ref name="author"/>
>> <rng:ref name="editor"/>
>> <rng:ref name="respStmt"/>
>> </rng:choice>
>> </rng:zeroOrMore>
>> </rng:group>
>> </rng:choice>
>> </rng:optional>
>> <rng:zeroOrMore>
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:ref name="model.noteLike"/>
>> <rng:ref name="meeting"/>
>> </rng:choice>
>> </rng:zeroOrMore>
>> <rng:zeroOrMore>
>> <rng:ref name="edition"/>
>> <rng:zeroOrMore>
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:ref name="idno"/>
>> <rng:ref name="editor"/>
>> <rng:ref name="respStmt"/>
>> </rng:choice>
>> </rng:zeroOrMore>
>> </rng:zeroOrMore>
>> <rng:ref name="imprint"/>
>> <rng:zeroOrMore>
>> <rng:choice>
>> <rng:ref name="imprint"/>
>> <rng:ref name="extent"/>
>> <rng:ref name="biblScope"/>
>> </rng:choice>
>> </rng:zeroOrMore>
>> </rng:group>
>> </content>
>>
>> The simplest way to proceed would be to replace every instance of editor
>> and/or author and/or respStmt with model.respLike; this, again, would
>> introduce<author> in a couple of contexts where it's currently excluded
>> (where<idno> shares a block with<editor> and<respStmt>). We also have
>> an explicit instance of<meeting>, which is also a member of model.respLike.
>>
>> My own instinct is to go ahead and use model.respLike in both<series>
>> and<monogr>, and accept the resulting arrival of<author> where it was
>> previously excluded; but I think it's important for the committee to
>> give an explicit OK to this, since I don't remember us discussing it in
>> detail at the meeting.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Martin
>>
>> On 11-04-21 12:46 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
>>> Yes .. apologies for lack of clarity!
>>>
>>> Sent from my HTC
>>>
>>> ----- Reply message -----
>>> From: "Martin Holmes"<mholmes at uvic.ca>
>>> Date: Thu, Apr 21, 2011 04:24
>>> Subject: [tei-council] Taking another ticket (2976715)
>>> To: "TEI Council"<tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU>
>>>
>>> Now I come to look at the minutes again, I realize I only understand
>>> half of this:
>>>
>>> > "Ticket 2976715: We agreed to add<distributor> to model.respLike,
>>>
>>> ...got that...
>>>
>>> > and
>>> > to use model.respLike within content models passim.
>>>
>>> ...but that bit isn't really clear to me. My comment on the ticket in
>>> October proposed two changes:
>>>
>>> 1. Add<distributor> to model.respLike, for consistency with
>>> <principal>,<funder> and<sponsor>.
>>>
>>> 2. Replace explicit references to author | editor | respStmt in the
>>> content model of biblStruct with a reference to the model.respLike
>>> class, so that<distributor>,<funder>,<sponsor> and<principal> are
>>> available where<author>,<editor> and<respStmt> currently are.
>>>
>>> Does the second bit in the minutes refer to #2 above?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> On 11-04-20 10:46 AM, Martin Holmes wrote:
>>> > Hi there,
>>> >
>>> > If no-one objects, I propose to implement this decision from the minutes:
>>> >
>>> > "Ticket 2976715: We agreed to add<distributor> to model.respLike, and
>>> > to use model.respLike within content models passim. The distinction
>>> > between intellectual responsibility and responsibility for distrribution
>>> > might be sorted out later."
>>> >
>>> > The second half of that ticket, which asks that "model.respLike be added
>>> > to<analytic>,<monogr> and<series>, so that these elements are
>>> > available in<biblStruct> citations" was presumably rejected or not
>>> > addressed -- does anyone remember which?
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> > Martin
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> .
>
--
Martin Holmes
University of Victoria Humanities Computing and Media Centre
(mholmes at uvic.ca)
More information about the tei-council
mailing list