[tei-council] repeating and typing tei:provenance

[Gabriel Bodard]

As there have been no objections since yesterday, I'll try to make these 
two small additions to the schema today. Would anybody like to discuss 
the changes to the guidelines text and examples with me? I'll be happy 
to implement those too, but would like to collaborate on authoring 
content if possible.

Cheers,

G

On 2011-09-26 16:17, Laurent Romary wrote:
> Another good point. If no one else shouts out loud, Gabriel can prepare the changes.
> Laurent
>
> Le 26 sept. 2011 à 17:08, Gabriel Bodard a écrit :
>
>> One further thought: I note that while tei:event has att.responsibility,
>> giving it both @cert and @resp, as discussed below, tei:provenance does
>> not. An oversight?
>>
>> G
>>
>> On 2011-09-26 15:53, Lou Burnard wrote:
>>> Well, my example was only a hypothetical one, and I don't want to insist
>>> on the point. I am probably over-cautious about applying "lets add a
>>> @type attribute" as a panacea....
>>>
>>> If no-one apart from me has qualms about this particular instance, I am
>>> happy to vote for pressing ahead with the change as Gabby formulates it.
>>>
>>>
>>>    elements to att.typed
>>>
>>> On 26/09/11 15:23, James Cummings wrote:
>>>> On 26/09/11 12:12, Lou Burnard wrote:
>>>>> "type" of a provenance might relate to any number of things -- its
>>>>> reliability, the kind of authority behind it, on what temporal basis
>>>>> it's made, etc.
>>>>> For example, suppose at some time a manuscript was in a
>>>>> collection which had a policy of checking up on it every 6 months. You
>>>>> might decide either to enter lots of provenance records saying
>>>>> effectively "it was taken out and dusted", or you might decide just to
>>>>> record a single provenance record for the whole time, including the info
>>>>> that dusting had been carried out every six months. Wouldn't these be of
>>>>> two different "type"s ("periodic" and "summary") as well?
>>>>
>>>> I would argue that this is not a provenance though, that is a
>>>> <custEvent>.  A<provenance>    is a single identifiable episode
>>>> during the history of a manuscript... taking it out a checking it
>>>> doesn't really count as that. It is an act of curation or
>>>> custodial event looking after it in the resource-holding
>>>> institution. A<provenance>    really is meant to be about the
>>>> history of the manuscript, often a patchy set of "It was owned by
>>>> so-and-so" and "it was stolen from this abbey", "it appeared in
>>>> sotheby's on this date", etc.  Any activity taking part in the
>>>> institution currently holding the manuscript would either be in
>>>> <acquisition>    or be a<custEvent>.
>>>>
>>>>> Your examples of intended use ("found", "moved", "observed", "lost",
>>>>> "destroyed", "restored" etc.) are fine for the case where you can map
>>>>> each provenance to a single event, but this is not the only way that
>>>>> <provenance>     might be used, and therefore not the only way they might be
>>>>> typed.
>>>>
>>>> But that is precisely how<provenance>    is defined, is it not?  "a
>>>> single identifiable episode during the history of a manuscript".
>>>>     Ok, sure, 'found' and 'moved' can happen during a since
>>>> <provenance>, I agree with that. But I would still argue that
>>>> provenances could be classified consistent with the way we use
>>>> @type elsewhere.
>>>>
>>>>> How about @eventType or even just @event ? (You could also add a value
>>>>> such as "multiple" or "summary" of course)
>>>>
>>>> This seems unnecessary to me.  What Gaby is suggesting is
>>>> something that classifies the 'type' of provenance, not
>>>> necessarily the types of events that happen in that single
>>>> provenance?
>>>>
>>>> -James
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> --
>> Dr Gabriel BODARD
>> (Research Associate in Digital Epigraphy)
>>
>> Department of Digital Humanities
>> King's College London
>> 26-29 Drury Lane
>> London WC2B 5RL
>>
>> Email: gabriel.bodard at kcl.ac.uk
>> Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
>> Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980
>>
>> http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
>> http://www.currentepigraphy.org/
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
> Laurent Romary
> INRIA&  HUB-IDSL
> laurent.romary at inria.fr
>
>
>

-- 
Dr Gabriel BODARD
(Research Associate in Digital Epigraphy)

Department of Digital Humanities
King's College London
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL

Email: gabriel.bodard at kcl.ac.uk
Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980

http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
http://www.currentepigraphy.org/