[tei-council] active/passive again

[Gabriel BODARD]

Since Council were unconvinced of the value of renaming the 
@active/@passive attributes on <relation> to something more rational 
such as @subject/@object, do you think we could at least express the 
definitions of these attributes in a way that is both grammatically and 
RDF-wise more comprehensible and sensible?

E.g. changing:
@active	identifies the ‘active’ participants in a non-mutual 
relationship, or all the participants in a mutual one.
--->
@active	identifies the subjects of the relationship statement defined by 
this element[, or all the participants in a mutual one<note 
resp="GB">although I don't think this is true, is it? What is @mutual 
for, then?</note>].

@passive	identifies the ‘passive’ participants in a non-mutual relationship.
--->
@passive	identifies the object(s) of the relationship statement made by 
this element.

(I think the existing definitions presuppose that relation points to two 
persons, whereas it is now explicitly defined as appropriate for 
pointing between persons, places, objects and events.)

You can probably find a better way to put this.

This is a small thing, but if it's considered controversial then I can 
create a ticket for it.

G

-- 
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/