[tei-council] 2.4.1 or 2.5.0?

Hugh Cayless philomousos at gmail.com
Wed Jul 24 11:28:16 EDT 2013 

It's the phrase "context of the element" I find ambiguous. I would normally consider the context of an element to be itself, not its parent.

On Jul 24, 2013, at 11:16 , Lou Burnard <lou.burnard at retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

> I don't find Hugh's wording at all clear. What is "the parent element"  
> if not the <certainty> element ? And these attributes are not only used 
> for expressions of certainty.
> 
> I *think* what we intend to mean is something like this:
> 
> 
> (1) <someElement xml:id="x">
>   <someRangingElement target="#x"/>
> </someElement>
> 
> Whatever "someRangingElement" says is applicable to <someElement>
> 
> (2) <someElement xml:id="x">
>   <someRangingElement target="#x" match="@foo"/>
> </someElement>
> 
> Whatever "someRangingElement" says is applicable to attribute @foo of 
> <someElement>
> 
> (3) <someElement xml:id="x">
>   <someRangingElement  match="@foo"/>
> </someElement>
> 
> Same as (2)
> 
> (4) <someElement xml:id="x">
>   <someRangingElement  />
> </someElement>
> 
> Same as (1)
> 
> 
> (5)  <someElement xml:id="x"/>
>   <someRangingElement target="#x"/>
> 
> same as (1)
> 
> (6)  <someElement xml:id="x"/>
>   <someRangingElement match="@foo"/>
> 
> Whatever "someRangingElement" says is applicable to attribute @foo of 
> the parent of <someElement>
> 
> (7)  <someElement xml:id="x"/>
>   <someRangingElement />
> 
> Whatever "someRangingElement" says is applicable to the parent of 
> <someElement>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 24/07/13 15:56, Hugh Cayless wrote:
>> Surely that should read something like:
>> 
>> If @target is not present, a relative XPath in @match has the parent element as its context. If neither attribute is present, the expression of certainty applies to the context of the certainty element itself, i.e. its parent element.
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 24, 2013, at 10:51 , Gabriel Bodard <gabriel.bodard at kcl.ac.uk> wrote:
>> 
>>> Is that what the prose in att.scoping says?
>>> 
>>> @match	supplies an arbitrary XPath expression identifying a set of
>>> nodes, selected within the context identified by the @target attribute
>>> if this is supplied, or within the context of the element bearing this
>>> attribute if it is not.
>>> 
>>> If neither attribute is present, the expression of certainty applies to
>>> the context of the certainty element itself, i.e. its parent element.
>>> 
>>> If it does mean what Lou says below, it certainly needs to be clarified...
>>> 
>>> G
>>> 
>>> On 2013-07-24 15:47, Lou Burnard wrote:
>>>> Wording can always be improved, but I think the intention in att.rsnging
>>>> is quite clear.
>>>> 
>>>> -- if both @match and @target are supplied, then @match is searched
>>>> within the context of @target
>>>> -- if only @match is present, then @match is searched within the context
>>>> of the parent of the current node
>>>> -- if neither is present, then the context is the current node
>>>> 
>>>> On 24/07/13 15:44, Gabriel Bodard wrote:
>>>>> That's how I interpret it to, but some people interpret the words in
>>>>> att.scoping, "within the context of the element bearing this attribute"
>>>>> as meaning the context is the `<precision>` element, not its parent.
>>>>> (This is confused by the fact that it explicitly says the context is the
>>>>> parent element if both @match and @target attributes are omitted.)
>>>>> 
>>>>> I agree with Lou, but I think the wording could be improved on
>>>>> att.scoping (and therefore the example there fixed as well).
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 2013-07-24 15:40, Lou Burnard wrote:
>>>>>> No, wait, why do we think it's wrong as it is?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> See definition for @match on att.ranging -- it says that if only @match
>>>>>> is preent, the context is the parent element, which in the second
>>>>>> example would be <date>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 24/07/13 15:38, Gabriel Bodard wrote:
>>>>>>> So wait, I'm fixing the example from saying match="@notBefore" to saying
>>>>>>> match="../@notBefore"?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> (The opposite of what you told me to correct it to on the ticket?)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2013-07-24 15:37, James Cummings wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 24/07/13 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Should you also fix the example that's in there now, and has an incorrect @match?
>>>>>>>> Yes, if you (Gabby), could fix the example (especially if adding
>>>>>>>> an additional one) that'd be good.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -James
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Jul 24, 2013, at 10:29 , Gabriel Bodard <gabriel.bodard at kcl.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Okay done. As I note on the ticket, I agree with Lou that discussion of
>>>>>>>>>> these attributes is needed in the guidelines, and I haven't had time to
>>>>>>>>>> add that. (And I dare say won't before Friday.) I leave the ticket open
>>>>>>>>>> as it remains a priority.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Should we maybe include Thomas Carlson's example in the elementSpec, as
>>>>>>>>>> a start? That seems safe enough...
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> G
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 2013-07-24 15:22, James Cummings wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess I don't mind if Gabby commits the change quickly. As
>>>>>>>>>>> Sebastian is doing the release on Friday that leaves us all
>>>>>>>>>>> tomorrow for extra proofreading!
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Sebastian is on holiday today and thursday, so probably
>>>>>>>>>>> can't/won't comment and is planning to do the release on Friday.
>>>>>>>>>>>        This leaves plenty of time for people to point out errors in
>>>>>>>>>>> the generation of the outputs. Martin can attest that I made good
>>>>>>>>>>> with my promise of a Tunnock's dark chocolate covered caramel
>>>>>>>>>>> wafer last time for finding lots of typos. (In case that
>>>>>>>>>>> encourages you!)
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Last release we noticed, during the release period, that a typo
>>>>>>>>>>> meant the links to the translated versions on the index.html
>>>>>>>>>>> pages were broken (fixed during release).
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Please do have a look at the outputs at
>>>>>>>>>>> http://bits.nsms.ox.ac.uk:8080/jenkins/ and under
>>>>>>>>>>> http://bits.nsms.ox.ac.uk:8080/jenkins/job/TEIP5/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/release/
>>>>>>>>>>> and check that all web pages work as expected, all the schemas
>>>>>>>>>>> and generated content do what they are supposed to.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> -James
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 24/07/13 14:39, Gabriel Bodard wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think if we do 2.4.1 this week (as it now seems), then 2.5.0 should
>>>>>>>>>>>> wait until the next cycle, probably at the end of the year--when we'll
>>>>>>>>>>>> have a bunch of new interesting things to include, as well as just
>>>>>>>>>>>> correcting the oversight in `<precision>`.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> There's still stuff to talk about re responsibility, relation and match,
>>>>>>>>>>>> for example.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> G
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2013-07-24 13:40, Syd Bauman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, this is a moot point as we're now frozen and it's not in. But
>>>>>>>>>>>>> FWIW, I think both GB and LB are right, so I'm in favor of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a) adding att.ranging to <precision>, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) not doing so now, so we can make sure the examples and discussion
>>>>>>>>>>>>>           make sense, and consider deprecating @degree
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can make a 2.5.0 release in a week or two, eh?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Dr Gabriel BODARD
>>>>>>>>>> Researcher in Digital Epigraphy
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Digital Humanities
>>>>>>>>>> King's College London
>>>>>>>>>> Boris Karloff Building
>>>>>>>>>> 26-29 Drury Lane
>>>>>>>>>> London WC2B 5RL
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
>>>>>>>>>> E: gabriel.bodard at kcl.ac.uk
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.currentepigraphy.org/
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> tei-council mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived
>>> -- 
>>> Dr Gabriel BODARD
>>> Researcher in Digital Epigraphy
>>> 
>>> Digital Humanities
>>> King's College London
>>> Boris Karloff Building
>>> 26-29 Drury Lane
>>> London WC2B 5RL
>>> 
>>> T: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
>>> E: gabriel.bodard at kcl.ac.uk
>>> 
>>> http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
>>> http://www.currentepigraphy.org/
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> tei-council mailing list
>>> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>>> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>>> 
>>> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived
> 
> -- 
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
> 
> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived

More information about the tei-council mailing list