[tei-council] biblscope and imprint

[Lou Burnard]

Tootling across france on the train yesterday I started trying to deal 
with http://purl.org/tei/FR/3555190...

The part about the scope of biblscope was fairly easy to add, as was 
guidance on usage of biblScope. But I hit a problem with the second 
part, where it says that biblScope doesn't belong inside <imprint> -- 
the logic behind that desire is impeccable, but it messes up an awful 
lot of out current practice.

Consider the following:

<biblStruct>
<analytic>
<author>Chesnutt, David</author>
<title>Historical Editions in the States</title>
</analytic>
<monogr>
<title level="j">Computers and the Humanities</title>
<imprint>
<biblScope>25.6</biblScope>
<date when="1991-12">(December, 1991):</date>
<biblScope>377–380</biblScope>
</imprint>
</monogr>
</biblStruct>

which is a fairly common pattern in P5 (and appears as the canonical
example for <imprint>)

If, following FR 3555190, we think <biblStruct> has no place within 
<imprint>, how should
this, and many similar cases, be tagged?

One possibility might be

<monogr>
<title level="j">Computers and the Humanities</title>
<biblScope>25.6</biblScope>
<biblScope>377–380</biblScope>
<imprint>
<date when="1991-12">(December, 1991):</date>
</imprint>
</monogr>

Another might be

<monogr>
<title level="j">Computers and the Humanities</title>
<biblScope>25.6</biblScope>
<biblScope>377–380</biblScope>
<biblScope type="date">(December, 1991)</biblScope>
</imprint>
</monogr>

or perhaps better

<biblScope><date when="1991-12">(December, 1991)</date></biblScope>


Another might be to tweak the content model so that
model.dateLike is permitted outside <imprint> and alongside <biblScope>

And another might be to reconsider the decision to remove <biblScope>
from within <imprint>

Any ideas? Everyone braced for the rush of complaints?