[tei-council] biblscope and imprint

[Kevin Hawkins]

The ticket proposes putting <biblScope>s after the <imprint> element 
when its present.  So your example would now be encoded as:

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

--Kevin

On 11/2/2012 7:02 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
> 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?
>