[tei-council] correspdesc musings

[James Cummings]

On 01/08/14 12:15, Lou Burnard wrote:
> 3. I am not sure that I understand fully the implications of
> distinguishing "sender" and "author". If my wife writes a postcard and
> we both sign it, I guess that my wife is the author and we are both
> senders: is that right?

That was one of the things I was worrying about but didn't quite 
get straight. But I'm assuming that is the case. There are 
multiple authors/senders/delivery-people/receivers/etc.


> 4. I don't see the need for a <correspClass> distinct from the existing
> (and already quite elaborate) text classification mechanisms in the TEI
> header. It seems to overlap entirely with the existing mechanism  @class
> attribute on  <msContents>

It seemed to be <keywords> to me.

> 6. The place a letter is actually sent from (as witnessed by the
> postmark, or other evidence) may be different from the place the
> sender/s say it is sent from. (We've all written postcards to send home,
> and forgotten to post them!). How would you handle that.

To me, different placeName elements with different @roles. (which 
is my I prefer placeName to a specifically named element.

> 7. I dont think @type and @subtype are strong enough to handle the full
> complexity of information one might want to record under
> <ct:transmission> -- this whole area of the proposal needs more
> elaboration I think. It might also be useful in this context to look at
> the work of the CMC sig, as I think I mentioned before.

agreed.

> 9. Where do I record metadata about other aspects of the transmission of
> the letter e.g. the type or design of the postage stamps? the presence
> or absence of publicity stamps in addition to the postmark proper?

Good point as well.

> Oooh, I see James has got his reactions in already, so I will pause here
> and see if we agree on anything...

A couple things at least...

-James


-- 
Dr James Cummings, James.Cummings at it.ox.ac.uk
Academic IT Services, University of Oxford