[tei-council] textLang and http://purl.org/tei/fr/3275613
lou.burnard at retired.ox.ac.uk
Tue Dec 6 13:06:56 EST 2011
(1) optionally the <att>otherLangs</att> -> optionally the
(2) "such as those used in ISO 639-1 (or three letter codes in ISO 639-2
or 639-3 if ISO 639-1 does not provide a two letter code)...described at
-- this is all a bit repetitive. Why not just reference vi.1 and say
it's done the same way?
"The @mainLang amnd @otherLangs attributes should both provide language
identifiers in the same form as the xml:lang attribute, as further
described at <ptr >"
(3) I would like to reinforce the distinction between this and xml:lang.
how about adding ", rather than in its description" at the end of the
<desc> so that it reads
" describes the languages and writing systems identified within the
bibliographic work being described, rather than in its description"
(4) Nothing to do with this particular topic, but since when did the
cross references start appearing inside the <desc> in its HTML
rendition? Looks weird to me.
On 06/12/11 17:21, Martin Holmes wrote:
> Hi James,
> You have a typo "geenerated".
> This bit also needs to lose a comma, or gain one:
> "...a manuscript description written in French which specifies that a
> particular manuscript contains predominantly German but also some Latin
> material, might have a textLang element like the following:"
> It needs a comma after "German", or it needs to lose the one after
> "material", otherwise you're separating your subject from your predicate
> with a comma.
> I seem to be incapable of doing anything except finding typos these
> days. I hereby designate myself Chief Typo Hunter. Given the number of
> ancient ones we found in chapter 11, perhaps I should be reading the
> whole guidelines from the beginning. Dreadful thort, though, that is.
> On 11-12-06 06:54 AM, James Cummings wrote:
>> I have done this, but not updated the prose or examples further
>> to indicate it is available in analytic/monogr/series as well.
>> Might someone with a better understanding of bibliographic markup
>> be willing to look at its discussion in CO? The bit I partly
>> plagiarised from MS is found at:
>> but now that it is available more widely maybe it should be
>> rewritten and inserted elsewhere?
>> On 05/12/11 17:33, Laurent Romary wrote:
>>> +1; go ahead James.
>>> Le 5 déc. 2011 à 18:19, Kevin Hawkins a écrit :
>>>> On 12/5/2011 12:12 PM, James Cummings wrote:
>>>>> I note that I was not asked to add this to the content model of
>>>>> <analytic> or<monogr>.... is that a problem? I.e. you can now
>>>>> say what languages a work uses when using<bibl> but not
>>>> More precisely, you can now give the language of a work described in
>>>> <biblStruct> but not of the work in<analytic> or<monogr> within a
>>>> <biblStruct>. I am in support of adding it to these two elements, plus
>>>> tei-council mailing list
>>>> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>>>> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived
>>> Laurent Romary
>>> INRIA& HUB-IDSL
>>> laurent.romary at inria.fr
More information about the tei-council