[tei-council] biblscope and imprint

[Lou Burnard]

Looking at this suggestion again: surely it cannot ever be right to put 
a <biblScope> within an <analytic> ?

See further my comment on the ticket -- specifically

"I think the sentence "Each <biblScope> describes where (within its 
parent element) to find the thing in the previous level" is correct, but 
only if you understand the word "level" as "preceding sibling of a 
different bibliographic level"

Hence the pagination biblScope ought to go within the monogr, not within 
the analytic. This also makes sense if the same article appears in two 
different monogrs, possibly with different pagination.



On 02/11/12 18:14, Lou Burnard wrote:
> On 02/11/12 15:11, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
>> Gabby's right. I was focusing on placement of <biblScope> in relation to
>> <imprint>.  So Lou's citation (from the Guidelines) would in fact be:
>>
>> <biblStruct>
>>      <analytic>
>>        <author>Chesnutt, David</author>
>>        <title>Historical Editions in the States</title>
>>        <biblScope type="pp">377–380</biblScope>
>>      </analytic>
>>      <monogr>
>>        <title level="j">Computers and the Humanities</title>
>>        <imprint>
>>          <date when="1991-12">(December, 1991):</date>
>>        </imprint>
>>        <biblScope type="vol">25</biblScope>
>>        <biblScope type="issue">6</biblScope>
>>      </monogr>
>> </biblStruct>
>>
>> On 11/2/2012 10:50 AM, Gabriel Bodard wrote:
>>> Is that what we proposed?
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered we had suggested to put the biblScope in the
>>> element whose scope is being defined by it, so<biblScope type="pp">
>>> goes in<analytic>  because the article is only pages 377-380 of the
>>> volume in question, and<biblScope type="issue">  goes in<monogr>
>>> because this volume is only issue 25.6 of the journal....
>>>
>>> But looking at this stuff I find myself more and more agreeing with
>>> Martin that biblStruct was never a good idea. ;-)
>>>
>>> G
>>>
>>> On 2012-11-02 14:29, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
>>>> 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?
>>>>>
>>>
>