[tei-council] Fwd: TEI TITE question

[Kevin Hawkins]

To respond to these two points ...

On 5/8/2012 7:54 AM, Gabriel BODARD wrote:
> I'm against inserting the sort of semantic sugar (actually not semantic
> is it, just presentational sugar) proposed in this discussion. For me
> the awkwardness of entering<hi rend="super">  is a feature, not a bug,
> as it encourages the coder to consider a more semantic tag. The example
> above, for example, shouldn't be<hi>  at all, it should be<am>  or
> <abbr>  or similar.

On 5/8/2012 8:52 AM, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
 > We shouldn't forget that the Tite extra tags must come from _somewhere_,
 > not just plucked at random from a fevered brain.  Why did that group 
feel these
 > were needed?

... I think the question is what uses of digital text the TEI aims to 
support.  The Guidelines "are addressed to anyone who works with any 
kind of textual resource in digital form", and yet:

a) We know that lots of workflows for large-scale digitization and 
conversion from born-digital documents recognize italics and bold 
without attempting to do the labor-intensive and difficult work of 
distinguishing them (cf. Gabby's comment).

b) We know that people have identified bold, italics, superscript, 
subscript, etc. as being such common features that they deserve their 
own elements (as in Sebastian's comment).

It seems to me that there is a compelling case for supporting a certain 
depth of encoding that doesn't try to disambiguate phrase-level 
features.  (This is Level 3 in the Best Practices for TEI in Libraries.) 
  This could be done using those particular features chosen for Tite.