[tei-council] TEI TITE question

[Gabriel BODARD]

I'm not entirely clear that the situation is quite the same as

 > <forename>
 > <surname>
 > <rs type="name">

(Or even <placeName>, <persName>, <rs type="name">.) What we have at the 
moment is no shortcuts for <hi rend="x"> at all, because the list of 
possible values for "x" is near infinite. (Even a short list is pretty 
long.)

We already have a long-established way to encode the undistinguished use 
of italics, the only argument against which is that it's more keystrokes 
than <it>. We could easily encourage more consistency in attribute 
values if we really wanted to--though I predict there will be resistance 
to doing so.

There is also a certain semantic value in the <hi> element, by which I 
mean in its very name, not it's attribute values: this text is 
highlighted in some way to set it apart from the surrounding text. I can 
imagine a transcription scenario when all you want to encode is that the 
text is set apart, not how it is rendered.

My opinion remains that there is a place for elements such as <i>, <b>, 
<sup>, etc., but that that place is in a custom schema for 
encoders/vendors, not in the published, interchangeable TEI.



On 08/05/2012 15:06, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
> No!
>
> We give people shortcut options like<name>  and<bibl>  instead of
> forcing them to think too much by using<forename>,<surname>, and
> <biblStruct>  because we know that for certain envisioned uses of the
> encoded document, these are perfectly sufficient.  How do we know that
> it's for someone's own good to distinguish various uses of italics?
>
> The situation we are in right now is as if the TEI had only:
>
> <forename>
> <surname>
> <rs type="name">
>
> but no:
>
> <name>
>
> (I understand the distinction Gabby made between semantic and
> presentational sugar, but now I'm talking about straightforwardness of
> encoding.)
>
> --K.
>
> On 5/8/2012 9:58 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
>> Exactly! and also to avoid thinking too much. Thought takes time and
>> costs money.
>>
>> On 08/05/12 14:43, Gabriel BODARD wrote:
>>> To save money on keystrokes, no?
>>>
>>> On 08/05/2012 13:52, 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?
>>>> --
>>>> Sebastian Rahtz
>>>> Head of Information and Support Group
>>>> Oxford University Computing Services
>>>> 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
>>>>
>>>> Sólo le pido a Dios
>>>> que el futuro no me sea indiferente
>>>>
>>>
>>

-- 
Dr Gabriel BODARD
(Research Associate in Digital Epigraphy)

Department of Digital Humanities
King's College London
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL

Email: gabriel.bodard at kcl.ac.uk
Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980

http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
http://www.currentepigraphy.org/