[tei-council] TEI TITE question

[Kevin Hawkins]

On 5/8/2012 10:25 AM, Gabriel BODARD wrote:
> 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.

But what is this long-established way?  I can think of many (with 
non-canonical practices marked with an asterisk):

<hi rend="i">

<hi rend="ii">

<hi rend="ital">

<hi rend="italic">

<hi rend="italics">

<hi rend="Kursiv">

<hi rendition="#foo"> with <rendition xml:id="foo" 
scheme="css">font-style: italic</rendition>

<hi rendition="#foo"> with <rendition xml:id="foo" scheme="free">This 
text is italicized.</rendition>

*<hi rend="font-style: italic">

> 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.

I agree with the value of <hi> and do not think we should eliminate this 
element.

> 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.

But it would be enormously helpful if the TEI could promote interchange 
of encoding of italics, bold, and other of the most common features in 
printed source documents!