[tei-council] rationalizing attributes on persName/placeName/orgName/name (3519806)

[Martin Holmes]

This all looks really good to me. I'm intrigued as to why <name> getting 
att.canonical twice didn't cause errors before, but perhaps ODD 
processing is robust enough to handle that now. Kudos to Sebastian, if so.

Cheers,
Martin

On 12-10-24 03:42 AM, James Cummings wrote:
> In implementing http://purl.org/tei/bug/3519806 to add
> att.datable to name, as I've been tasked to do I have the
> following proposal (that I will implement before the deadline
> today if no strenuous objections are made).
>
> The current situation:
> persName: att.global, att.datable, att.editLike, att.personal,
> att.typed
> placeName: att.global, att.datable, att.editLike, att.naming,
> att.typed
> orgName: att.global, att.datable, att.editLike, att.personal,
> att.typed
> name: att.global, att.naming, att.personal, att.typed
>
> Note that placeName and name claim membership of att.naming which
> provides @role ("may be used to specify further information about
> the entity referenced by this name") and @nymRef ("reference to
> the canonical name") but includes att.canonical.
>
> Note that persName and orgName claim att.personal which provides
> @full ("indicates whether the name component is given in full")
> and @sort ("specifies the sort order") but includes att.naming
> and att.canonical.
>
> Note that name claims membership in att.naming and att.personal
> (doesn't this mean it gets att.canonical twice?) and does not get
> att.editLike which all the rest get which provides @evidence,
> @source, and @instant.
>
> My proposal: aside from removing a prose statement saying that
> @sort only refers to personal names (which seems weird to me), I
> would like to rationalize all of these.
>
> I would suggest that name and placeName not claim membership in
> att.naming, but instead (the probably misnamed) att.personal. I
> would also have name claim membership in att.editLike.
>
> This would result in all
> persName: att.global, att.datable, att.editLike, att.naming,
> att.typed
> placeName: att.global, att.datable, att.editLike, att.naming,
> att.typed
> orgName: att.global, att.datable, att.editLike, att.naming, att.typed
> name: att.global, att.datable, att.editLike, att.naming, att.typed
>
> So all of these would get the same attributes. If I've understood
> correctly then no elements would lose attributes and name would
> become significantly richer and have the same attributes of the
> others. (Which means that our claim that <*Name> is syntactic
> sugar for <name type="*"> is closer to the truth.) If implemented
> I'll make sure the descriptions are consistent.
>
> Does anyone have any objections to this? Or does anyone see any
> major pitfalls in terms of recursive class membership that I'm
> overlooking? (If so, I'll postpone until after release.)
>
> -James
>

-- 
Martin Holmes
University of Victoria Humanities Computing and Media Centre
(mholmes at uvic.ca)