[tei-council] [TEI-notify] SF.net SVN: tei:[11278] trunk/P5/Source/Guidelines/en/CO-CoreElements.xml

[Kevin Hawkins]

I've come back to this with fresh eyes ...

On 12/29/12 11:09 AM, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
> On 12/29/12 10:51 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
>> On 29/12/12 14:07, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
>>
>>> Actually, the prose no longer says this (see below), so in this latest
>>> commit I corrected the example so that the Merlin example no longer has
>>> an inferred value of @level.
>>
>> I'm referring to the following:
>>
>> "In this case, the analytic title <q>Notes on Manuscripts of the
>> <title level="m" xml:lang="fr">Prophécies de Merlin</title></q> needs no
>> <att>level</att>
>> attribute because it is directly contained by an <gi>analytic</gi>
>> element. The  monographic title it contains similarly needs no
>> <att>level</att> attribute, since it is a constituent of the analytic
>> title. "
>>
>> which follows an example in which the @level attribute *is* supplied, on
>> both <title>s. I think that's rather confusing.
>
> Fair enough, even though the "needs to <att>level</att> attribute" is
> still strictly true.

(I meant "needs no <att>level</att> attribute".)

>>>> A sentence has been added earlier saying that we recommend always
>>>> supplying the @level attribute, which I don't recall our having
>>>> discussed as such.
>>>
>>> Following the sentence "When it appears directly within an
>>> <gi>analytic</gi>, <gi>monogr</gi>, or <gi>series</gi> element,
>>> <gi>title</gi> is interpreted as belonging to the appropriate level.",
>>> the Guidelines used to say:
>>>
>>> When it appears elsewhere, its <att>level</att> attribute should be used
>>> to signal its bibliographic level.
>>>
>>> But at revision 7964, Lou changed it to:
>>>
>>> However, it is recommended that the <att>level</att> attribute should
>>> always be used to signal this explicitly
>>
>> No need to be ad hominem about this. I stand by my assertion that this
>> recommendation needs more justification (f  @level is not
>>   >> mandatory on <title> (which it currently isn't) then we ought to
>> explain
>>   >> in what circs it can be omitted, and how its absence is to be
>>   >> interpreted, (as we currently do more or less). And we ought to have
>>   >> some examples showing it being omitted, obv.
>
> Possibly, though the "however" sentence follows the one about appearing
> directly within <analytic>, <monogr>, and <series>, so it seems to me
> that we are giving this recommendation only in the case that <title>
> appears directly within <analytic>, <monogr>, and <series>.  Maybe that
> recommendation should be expanded to other positions in which <title>
> may appear (such as in a <bibl> or elsewhere in the document).  Or we
> should revert this particular change from revision 7964.

I have tried to clarify things:

http://tei.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/tei/trunk/P5/Source/Guidelines/en/CO-CoreElements.xml?r1=11371&r2=11370&pathrev=11371

--Kevin