Menu
▾
▴
#282 dictionary entires with a single sense
closed-fixed
5(default)
2013-10-10
2011-04-01
No
Examples in the Guidelines of dictionary entries with a single sense do not use <sense> at all. Recent discussion on TEI-L ( http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1103&L=TEI-L&T=0&F=&S=&P=17925 ) seems to reach consensus that <sense> should be used even if there is only one sense in order to maintain parallel structure across entries and make processing of entries easier. I suggest at the minimum mentioning this possibility in the prose and at the most updating examples to include a <sense> in all cases in order to exemplify this best practice.
Good initiative Kevin: agree.
Sounds plausible to me. Would someone care to go through the chapter indicating which examples need change though? Also would it be worth adding one or other of the examples mentioned in the TEI-L discussion thread?
I can do this. Will add it to my list. If there are no objections, I'll do this directly in the appropriate file in SourceForge rather than posting a list of changes on this ticket.
Just for the record: thumbs up from me to record this as good practice. There is a small argument for using just <def> if <def> is all that's needed, but yeah, I wouldn't want to call that good practice.
kevin will do; making sure to leave in a suboptimal example, mentioning use of entryFree
kevin will do; making sure to leave in a suboptimal example, mentioning use of entryFree
Implemented at revision 9842.