[tei-council] stamps

[Syd Bauman]

I'm not sure the proposed content model:

  ( model.phrase | model.gLike | model.descLike)* 

makes sense for two reasons. One I think is just a boo-boo, so I'll
address it later. But the other boils down to the idea that this
change doesn't solve the problem, in the big picture.

Lou correctly points out the main problem -- that it's not entirely
clear whether <stamp> is supposed to hold the transcription of a
stamp, or a description of it. This (IMHO) is because
a) there is a strong desire on the part of many to transcribe what
   has been stamped using <stamp>, and 
b) there is an example in 10.3.3 that shows it being used that way
despite the description of <stamp> clearly saying it "contains a word
or phrase describing a stamp".

I share Paul's instinct that this is very similar to a figure, where
one might want to describe it (<figDesc>), give a facsimile of it
(<graphic>), or transcription of (what is written in) it
(<floatingText>) or some combination thereof.

I'm guessing that we can confine transcriptions of stamps to within
something a lot smaller than a <floatingText>. So my instinct is to
have something like
  ( model.pLike | model.descLike | model.graphicLike )*
as the content of <stamp>, with prose that discuss and examples that
show <desc> used to describe it, <ab> used to provide a
transcription, and <graphic> used to provide an image.

This would be problematic, of course, because it would potentially
invalidate lots of current uses of <stamp>, which often has text
content.

Speaking of which, the boo-boo I referred to above is that the
proposed content does not include text. Since it does include
model.gLike we can surmise that this is just an oversight, though.