#445 Core chapter requires examples of linking quotes to refs

closed-accepted
Martin Holmes
5
2013-02-01
2012-09-27
Martin Holmes
No

This thread on TEI-L:

http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1204&L=TEI-L&F=&S=&P=57936

demonstrates that guidance on linking quotations with references should be improved, probably in the Core chapter, 3.3.3. Assigned by the Council FTF to MDH, September 2012. This arises out of the now-closed ticket http://purl.org/TEI/BUGS/3520414.

Discussion

<< < 1 2 3 > >> (Page 2 of 3)
  • I don't think lb/@source would make sense, or quote/@edRef, tempting as it is.
    The @source on <writing> seems far too useful to keep just for this rather obscure element,
    but we cant add it to att.sourced. att.cited or something?

     
  • Martin Holmes
    Martin Holmes
    2013-01-10

    att.cited or att.cite works for me. But I really feel like att.sourced should be renamed, don't you? Unless we can convince ourselves that it means "source edition".

     
  • Laurent Romary
    Laurent Romary
    2013-01-10

    For the record, while making an ODD spec of EAG and incorporating TEI components, I have become a fan of @source, which is exactly appropriate for the current discussion. So +1. +1 also on revamping att.sourced which is some kind of a naming infelicity.

     
  • James Cummings
    James Cummings
    2013-01-10

    Re: @corresp

    Where another attribute exists to do what I want I'll use that other attribute. But where I just want to say "this element here is somehow vaguely related in some way but I'm not telling you how it is just something I know" then I use @corresp all the time for this. I disagree that it must be a strictly mutual relationship. (It may have been invented as such, but usage over time by many people has certainly departed from this and I view it as a general purpose relationship pointer these days.) See, I'm not entirely a purist.;-)

    I'm also a fan of having @ref on things where there may be more additional information. Why @citRef when we could use @ref? But having @source would certainly be more specific.

    Not sure that helps much, sorry.
    -James

     
  • James may be right in saying that @corresp's mutuality may be weaker than it was; but if it asserts a vague undefined relationship only, we should be _promoting_ its use qua @source (and its promotion and recommend that we came in on).

    I suspect Laurent is using a different @source, and I am worried that the correlation is not there.

     
  • Martin Holmes
    Martin Holmes
    2013-01-10

    I suggested adding <quote> to att.canonical earlier, and given James's view, I think that's a better solution than creating a new attribute just for this purpose.

    If we do that, we should presumably add <q> as well -- any others? Presumably not <said>?

     
  • att.canonical doesnt seem right for a bibliographical link. "canonical information about the object being named or referenced"? your example takes a fragment of what Tolkien wrote, there is no formal object there. you want to name the source of the quotation, not canonical information? equating a quotation with the list of named real-life objects using att.canonical seems wrong.

    alternatively, edit the description in att.canonical...

     
  • My concrete suggestion is:

    * rename att.sourced to att.edition, and change its members accordingly
    * create new att.source with members egXML, q, quote, writing (and said?)
    and an attribute @source, which is data.pointer
    * remove local @source from writing

     
  • Laurent Romary
    Laurent Romary
    2013-01-10

    Perfect. And don't be afraid, this exactly the kind of @source I would want

     
  • Martin Holmes
    Martin Holmes
    2013-01-10

    Agreed, this is the best solution.

    Re <said>: I would not include it, on reflection, since it's explicitly about thoughts and speech, rather than quotation; and in any case, it can be contained in a <quote>, and can contain one, so if an attribution of source is necessary, wrapping will solve the problem.

    Any objections? If not, I'll go ahead and do this, and then update the Core chapter section I added to use @source instead of @corresp.

     
<< < 1 2 3 > >> (Page 2 of 3)