[tei-council] Fwd: TEI TITE question

[Paul F. Schaffner]

On the 'pro' side, I've written schemas using i/b/u/sup/sub and
found them handy, especially for vendor use (and for string-based
processing). And they do have a reassuringly rootedness in actual
page phenomena: TCP tried instead to get keyers to recognize
'salience' or markedness, which required them to identify first
the unmarked default font of every structural unit. The result has
been almost unmitigated disaster. We should have simply asked them
to identify fonts and leave it at that.

On the 'con' side, I already find myself protesting the inadequacy of
the list. 'Bold' in particular is meaningless before, I think, the
19th century. Our chief contrasts are roman-italic-blackletter, with
occasional subtype contrasts (rotunda/textura/bastarda) and of course
font-size contrasts. On the Continent, it would be a little different.
And with non-Latin alphabets more different still.

pfs



On Sun, 6 May 2012, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:

>
> On 6 May 2012, at 14:35, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
>
>> Note that at http://purl.org/TEI/fr/3075996 , in which we discuss
>> incorporating parts of Tite into P5, we've considering having a fixed
>> list of values for @rend in Tite.  This solution could potentially be
>> used in P5 as well.
>
> with the (so far non-existent) facility for TEI to modify itself, I could
> imagine a TEI module called "strict" which had provided fixed
> lists for @rend, to avoid everyone having to do it in their own ODD
>
> Sebastian
> -- 
> 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
>
>
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schaffner | PFSchaffner at umich.edu | http://www.umich.edu/~pfs/
316-C Hatcher Library N, Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI 48109-1190
--------------------------------------------------------------------