[tei-council] surfaces, surfaceGrps, etc. [was : minutes/release deadline]

[Martin Holmes]

Hi all,

On 11-11-19 10:25 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
> On 14/11/11 10:57, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>>
>> On 14 Nov 2011, at 05:09, Martin Holmes wrote:
>>
>>> <zone>   should be able to contain<surface>. You define a<zone>   to show
>>> the contextualized coordinates of the patch or whatever in the parent
>>> <surface>   coordinate space, then you put a<surface>   in it; the latter
>>> can then define its own coordinate space for<zone>s inside it.
>>>
>>> So the coordinates on<zone>s mean "my position and size in the parent
>>> space", and the coordinates on<surface>   mean "the coordinate space in
>>> which child<zone>s will be defined".
>>
>
> Sorry to come back to this after such a long pause. Let's see if I've
> got it right yet:
>
> We distinguish two use cases:
>
> a. a surface within a surface, both using the same coord system
>
> b. a surface within a surface, which sets up a new coord system

> Using the (despised and rejected) @coords attribute simply in order to
> save typing time, case (a) would thus be
>
> <surface coords="1,1,10,10">
>     <zone coords="2,3,7,8">
>         <surface>...</surface>
>     </zone>
>
> i.e. the inner surface inherits its size and position from its parent
> zone: it's at 2,3,7,8 on a scale running 1-10 in either direction

That's an acceptable shorthand, I think. We'll need to make it explicit, 
and for clarity I'd want to express it fully first, before explaining 
that it can be abbreviated -- so the full version would be:

<surface coords="1,1,10,10">
    <zone coords="2,3,7,8">
        <surface coords="2,3,7,8">...</surface>
    </zone>


> Case (b) would be
>
> <surface coords="1,1,10,10">
>      <zone coords="2,2,5,5">
>         <surface coords="1,1,100,100">...</surface>
> 		<zone xml:id="z2" coords="12,45,45,45">...</zone>
>         </surface>
>      </zone>
> <zone xml:id="z3" coords="3,2,7,8">  ...</zone>
>
> </surface>
>
> here the inner surface located at 2,2,5,5 defines its own much finer
> coordinate system, running 1-100 in either direction. The zone with id
> z2 is expressed using that system. Whereas the zone with id z3 is
> specified using the 1-10, 1-10 scale.

That looks perfect.

> Did we agree by the way, that<surfaceGrp>  can take coordinates, and
> behave in the same way as<surface>  ?

Personally I don't think we need <surfaceGrp>; I think a <zone> would do 
the job. What can <surfaceGrp> do that <zone> can't do?

> And did we agree on how to interpret the case where a<surface>  contains
> both coordinates and @points?

I think we agreed that since <surface> is always establishing a 
coordinate system, and a coordinate system must always be rectangular, 
we don't need @points on <surface>, only on <zone>.

That gives us the rather odd possibility of a non-rectangular <zone> 
which contains a <surface> that must have a rectangular coordinate 
system, though.

Cheers,
Martin