[tei-council] Responses to Primary Sources #1 (up to the end of 11.1)

Sat Nov 26 05:09:00 EST 2011

On 24/11/11 18:42, Martin Holmes wrote:

>
> Repetition of "for example". Recommend substituting "such as" for the
> second instance:
>

thus producing a repetition of "such"? canged the first for example into 
"perhaps"

> "It may sometimes contain a variety of images of the same source pages,
> for example of different resolutions, or of different kinds. Such a
> collection may form part of any kind of document, for example a
> commentary of a codicological or paeleographic nature, where there is a
> need to align explanatory text with image data."
>
> ------------
>
> Superfluous "And" at the beginning of this sentence, especially since
> "also" is present:
>
> "And it may also be complemented..."
>

ok

> ------------
>
> In this sentence:
>
> "These elements make it possible to accommodate multiple images of each
> page, as well as to record arbitrary planar coordinates of textual
> elements on any kind of written surface and to link such elements with
> digital facsimile images of them."
>
> I don't believe that we need the word "textual"; it implies (to me at
> any rate) that non-textual elements on the page cannot be identified by
> <zone>s. Suggest either deletion of the word, or "textual or other
> elements".

have simplified to "to record the position and relative size of elements 
identified"

>
> --------------
>
> The description of sourceDoc depends on the phrase "dossier génétique".
> I think this should be glossed in English. I don't know what it should
> be glossed with, of course.
>

added "... or collection of sources"

> --------------
>
> In this sentence:
>
> "Either of the facsimile and sourceDoc elements may be used to represent
> a digital facsimile."
>
> I maintain that "and" should be "or".

Tricky point of usage... and I am not sure I agree with you. But in the 
interests of consistency, I've changed it anyway.

>
> ---------------
>
> The first example of mapping coordinate spaces, using the Karlsruhe
> image, is pointlessly complicated.

Not pointlessly, but too complex for a first example I agree. Will work 
on this .

>
> In Figure 3, Zones within a surface, the added zone boundaries should be
> in a different colour from the original image, so it's clear to the
> reader that they are an artifact of the encoding, not part of the
> original page.

That means redoing the image! gak. Will have a go.
>
> -------------------
>
> The first example of using the @points attribute, on the Bovelles image,
> is pointlessly complicated:
>
> <zone
>       points="4.88147,31.0344 5.46483,30.7339 5.58857,32.2011
> 5.85374,32.8022 6.10123,33.4386 5.53554,33.7744 5.11128,33.3679
> 4.65166,32.2542"/>
>
> Why not just use integers here? Nothing is gained by five decimal
> places, other than to slightly intimidate the reader. Most uses of
> @points will use whole numbers (based on pixels within the image, below
> which there is little purpose in descending).

I blame S. Rahtz.

>
> -------------------
>
> 11.1.1:
>
> ------------------
>
> In the Bovelles transcription, which links with the image further up the
> page, the zone "B49rHead" is defined to contain both<head>  elements
> that appear at the beginning of the<div>  (including "Chapitre
> septiesme"). However, in the transcription example, only the first
> <head>  is linked to that<zone>  using @facs. I suggest that either:
>
> 	- The transcription be modified to contain a single<head>, so it can
> be unambiguously linked to the<zone>, or
>
> 	- The image of zones be modified to split that zone into two, so that
> each can be linked to its appropriate<head>.
>

well spotted. Fixed.

> -------------------
>
> 11.1.2:
>
> This whole section, which is tiny, seems superfluous to me. Its contents
> have already been covered above ("a legal TEI document may thus comprise
> any of the following : ..."), and if the explanation above is
> insufficient, it should be expanded so this section can be deleted.
> Another way of looking at this section is that it comprises the
> introduction to 11.1.3, in which case it should be folded into it.

The paragraph is meant to introduce the following sections on 
transcription, not to be a freestanding section of its own.
but a </diV> got misplace3d.

> In this sentence:
>
> "An embedded transcription is one in which words and other written
> traces are encoded as subcomponents of elements representing the
> physical surfaces carrying them rather than independently of them. "
>
> I recommend a comma after "carrying them".
>

OK

--------------------
>
> This sentence might not be true:
>
> "Equally, the encoder may choose to provide only graphics without any
> transcription, to provide only a structured (non-embedded)
> transcription, or to provide any combination of the three."
>
> I don't think<facsimile>  +<sourceDoc>  +<text>  is actually allowed, is
> it? If it is, then it needs to be included in the list further up the
> page ("a legal TEI document may thus comprise any of the following : ").
>

I think it is true. Both <facsimile> and <sourceDoc> are members of 
model.resourceLike. It was also a requirement expressed by some people 
to have both <facsimile> and <sourceDoc>, when we proposed to merge the 
two. I didnt want to propose it explicitly above, since I think it's 
mad, but the content model does permit it.