[tei-council] Location of <app>s for external apparatus

[James Cummings]

On 13/06/12 23:09, Martin Holmes wrote:
> Yes -- the issue is:
>
>    - We don't offer guidance
>
>    - The guidance Lou and James suggested offering (putting<app>s in a
> <div>) doesn't actually work

Apologies, I left out that I had wrapped these in an <ab> per 
grouping. (e.g. in case of poetry an <ab> for each large <lg> or 
poem, in the case of prose for each <div> or <p> depending on the 
number of variants and the granularity of the <app>.

So it is:

<div>
    <ab>
       <app xml:id="app1">...</app>
       <app xml:id="app2">...</app>
   <!-- ... -->
    </ab>
</div>


-James

>
>    - Similar solutions look a bit ad-hoc and flaky (putting<app>s in
> e.g.<p>)
>
> So I think everything would be cleaner if we offered<listApp>, and it
> would also give people the option to sort<app>s into groups for
> specific purposes (not sure what those purposes would be, myself) and
> type them with @type and @subtype.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> On 12-06-13 02:43 PM, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
>> Isn't what's broken here the fact that P5 mentions use of an external
>> apparatus but gives no clear guidance on how to do this?  Gabby says you
>> can do this by "collecting loose apps together in a<p>" ... but this
>> sounds like tag abuse to me.  If people want to encode a list of
>> apparatus entries, then I think we need to offer<listApp>.
>>
>> On 6/13/2012 3:30 PM, Gabriel BODARD wrote:
>>> For the record, I think I just collect loose apps together in a<p>    (or
>>> sometimes one per<p>, I think my XSLT doesn't care which). In principle
>>> a listApp would be useful (although it would only be *nice*, rather than
>>> fixing something that's actually broken), although app should of course
>>> continue to be available in<p>    because we also use them for inline
>>> apparatus features.
>>>
>>> </rambling>
>>>
>>> On 13/06/2012 19:26, Martin Holmes wrote:
>>>> It turns out<app>     cannot be a child of<div>     (so either James
>>>> customized his schema when listing<app>s in a<div>, or he's
>>>> misremembering). I'm beginning to think that<listApp>     might be a good
>>>> idea as a way of collecting<app>s which are external to the base text,
>>>> but I'm not sure where<listApp>     should be available yet, or how. Any
>>>> thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> On 12-06-12 05:21 PM, Stuart A. Yeates wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Martin Holmes<mholmes at uvic.ca>      wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This ticket landed on my plate following Ann Arbor:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://purl.org/tei/bug/3497356>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The basic issue was that Jens thought a<listApp>      element might be
>>>>>> useful, for collecting together a set of<app>      elements in an apparatus
>>>>>> which is not embedded in the base text.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These were my instructions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "MH will ask the submitter (and the TEI-L, pointing to the ticket) for
>>>>>> any examples of the use of<div>      which suggest that<listApp>      might be
>>>>>> useful (for instance, organization of<apps>      into multiple<div>      s with
>>>>>> @type). "
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, it seems from the ticket that James, Lou and Jens himself all
>>>>>> agree that<listApp>      is not necessary, so I see no reason to resurrect
>>>>>> this, other than to add some clarification to the relevant guidelines
>>>>>> section to suggest that<app>s might be stored in a<div
>>>>>> type="apparatus">      element.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If no-one has any objections, that's what I'll do, rather than going
>>>>>> back to Jens or TEI-L.
>>>>>
>>>>> Seems like a sane approach.
>>>>>
>>>>> cheers
>>>>> stuart
>>>>
>>>
>


-- 
Dr James Cummings, InfoDev,
Computing Services, University of Oxford