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

[Kevin Hawkins]

Yes indeed.  :(  Now fixed at revision 11372.

On 1/10/13 9:12 PM, Martin Holmes wrote:
> HI Kevin,
>
> I think in this bit:
>
> the monographic title contained with it, <q xml:lang="fr">Prophécies de
> Merlin</q>, is not semantically erroneous because it is not directly
> contained by the <gi>analytic</gi> element.
>
> it should be "contained _within_ it", shouldn't it?
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> On 13-01-10 05:47 PM, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
>> 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
>>