#351 Chapter 13 Typos, etc.

GREEN
closed
Lou Burnard
5
2012-03-13
2012-02-15
No

Page references to version 2.0.2.

P. 404:

Normalisation of date and time values permits the efficient processing of data (for example, to determine whether one event precedes or follows another). These examples all use the W3C standard format for representation of dates and times. Further examples, and discussion of some alternative approaches to normalization are given in section 13.3.6.3. More Expressive Normalizations below.

Comment: The Guidelines should normalise (or rather: normalize) "normalise". Searching in Acrobat, I find 10 instances of "normalise" against 77 instances of "normalize", but I think this is the only place where the two forms occur in the same paragraph.

The same applies, of course, to other "ise"/"ize" words: I note "specialise" (33), "standardise" (3).

Similarly, we have "colour" (33) and "color" (10).

#

P. 404: "referencing string" (5) => "referring string" (20).

#

P. 405: "a proper noun or proper-noun phrase referring to a person, possibly including
any or all of the person's forenames, surnames, honorifics, added names, etc."

Comment: One cannot have "possibly" and "any" in the same quantification. Delete "possibly".

#

P. 408: "Some names include generational or dynastic information, such as a number, or phrases such as ‘Junior’, or ‘the Elder’; these qualifications may also be used to distinguish similarly named but unrelated people."

Comment: genName's are used to distinguish persons who are related by blood, but otherwise have the same name: Wilson Junior/Wilson Senior, Christian IV/Christian V. If genName's can be used for something else, we need an example to show this (and an explanation why they are called genName's). Dates are used in bibliographical records to distinguish unrelated persons with the same name, but that is a different matter.

#

P. 409: "supply culture- or application- specific distinctions."

Comment: delete space after second hyphen.

#

P. 409: "since this is intended to describe the role of this part of the name, not the
role of the person bearing the name."

Comment: "military" or "Colonel" do not "describe the role of this part of the name" of Colonel Gadaffi (which e.g. "adjunct" would). Instead: "since this is intended to describe the role of the person when this role is a part of the name, not the role of the person bearing the name in general."

#

P. 410: "these mechanisms for marking personal name components will not cater for every personal
name and processing need."

Comment: What is a "personal name need"? Which needs does processing have that we must satisfy? Instead: "will not cover all forms of personal names".

#

P. 410: "businesses or institutions such as ‘Harvard College’ or ‘the BBC’". We all know that the BBC is a venerable British institution, but the implication that Harvard is a business is an interesting one!

#

P. 410: "In the case of business or other formally constituted institutions". For "business", write "businesses".

#

P. 411: "The components of an organization's name are not always personal names. They may also include place names:"

Comment: Who said (indeed, who would say) that "the components of an organization's name are always personal names"? Instead: "The components of an organization's name may also include place names:"

#

P. 412: "organizational names may also be specified hierarchically particularly where the named organization is itself a department or a branch of a larger organizational entity."

Comment: To be specified hierarchically, they would need to be nested, the department inside the university, but this is not possible here. What I see is an unordered list which does not specify any hierarchical relation.

#

P. 412, footnote: "Strictly, a suitable value such as figurative should be added to the two place names which are presented periphrastically in the second example here, in order to preserve the distinction indicated by the choice of <rs> rather than <name> to encode them in the first version."

Comment: This sentence can be made slightly more comprehensible by substituting "example" for "version".

#

P. 417: "a encoded" => "an encoded" (also 713).

#

P. 417:

In addition, a small number of very commonly used personal properties may be recorded using attributes specific to <person> (and <personGrp>)
<person> provides information about an identifiable individual, for example a participant in a language interaction, or a person referred to in a historical source.
@role specifies a primary role or classification for the person.
@sex specifies the sex of the person.
@age specifies an age group for the person.

Comment: Something has gone wrong here. Punctuation is lacking after "<person> (and <personGrp>)" - there should probably be a colon. "<person> provides information about an identifiable individual, for example a participant in a language interaction, or a person referred to in a historical source." repeats the element definition one page back. The theme is the person element throughout - this is also stated in the preceding paragraph which mentions that attributes will be listed, but then we get this element definition. Delete "<person> provides information about an identifiable individual, for example a participant in a language interaction, or a person referred to in a historical source." and supply colon.

Discussion

  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2012-02-15

    Thanks for these comments. For the most part your proposals for improvement seem fine to me. A few quick comments follow:

    1. on IZE vs ISE endings, I agree we should standardiZe : a job for Martin's regexp.

    2. on Am vs BrE variants the original policy was to try to avoid words which were markedly either Br or Am. So probably we should have used "hue" or some other synonym rather than either "colour" or "color". As we failed there, the rule of least effort should presumably apply.

    3. "possibly including any or all of the person's forenames, surnames, honorifics, added names, etc" I think it would be a mistake to delete "possibly". If you don't like the "any or all" construction, I suggest "possibly including one or more of the..."

    4. "genName's are used to distinguish persons who are related by blood, but otherwise have the same name: Wilson Junior/Wilson Senior, C" Distinguishing identically-named blood relatives is one use for <genName>, but the not the only one. It's intended for any kind of additional name component which says something about the generation to which the person concerned belongs. Thus "William the younger" vs "William the fat". (By the way, we dont mark plurals with an apostrophe in conventional British English)

    5 "cater for every personal name and processing need." is a rather too condensed way of saying "cater for every personal name, or for every processing requirement"

    6. "The components of an organization's name are not always personal names. They may also include place names:" I am not clear what you are objecting to here. All this is saying is that an organisation's name might be composed of a placename, a personal name, etc.

    7. I agree that the example of a "hierarchically organized" name is not itself hierarchically organized. The example needs some additional comment to explain this; or we need to find a better one.

     
  • Thank you for your replies, Lou.

    3. "possibly including any or all of the person's forenames, surnames,
    honorifics, added names, etc" I think it would be a mistake to delete
    "possibly". If you don't like the "any or all" construction, I suggest
    "possibly including one or more of the..."

    >I see. What is bothering me is that "possibly" opens up for none, and you cannot include none: you have to include at least one name of some kind. Here, "one or more" does not help (except to eliminate the common implication that "any" means "any single one"). - I waive the point.

    4. "genName's are used to distinguish persons who are related by blood, but
    otherwise have the same name: Wilson Junior/Wilson Senior, C"
    Distinguishing identically-named blood relatives is one use for <genName>,
    but the not the only one. It's intended for any kind of additional name
    component which says something about the generation to which the person
    concerned belongs. Thus "William the younger" vs "William the fat". (By the
    way, we dont mark plurals with an apostrophe in conventional British
    English)

    >I see. I could have a colleague named "Lou" and I would call him "Lou junior" to distinguish him from you. I think there should be an example to illustrate <genName>s of this kind.

    6. "The components of an organization's name are not always personal names.
    They may also include place names:" I am not clear what you are objecting
    to here. All this is saying is that an organisation's name might be
    composed of a placename, a personal name, etc.

    >I am probably reading too much implicature into this. "Not all TEI practitioners have to sniff cocaine to cope with the Guidelines; all Lou needs is a cup of tea". - I waive the point.

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2012-03-13

    • milestone: --> GREEN
    • assigned_to: nobody --> louburnard
    • status: open --> closed
     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2012-03-13

    As of version 10160 I think all corrections agreed have now been applied, even without benefit of cocaine, so I am closing the ticket.