deprecate idiosyncratic @type on <g> and use @ref and <glyph>

XML text markup for ancient documents

Brought to you by: filosam, gabrielbodard, hcayless, paregorios, sdigiulio

#81 deprecate idiosyncratic @type on <g> and use @ref and <glyph>

Milestone: future

Status: done

Owner: Pietro Maria Liuzzo

Labels: guidelines and xslts (11) dclp (3) schema (9)

Priority: 8

Updated: 2020-05-19

Created: 2014-11-10

Creator: Tom Elliott

Private: No

Examples of the use of the <g> element throughout the Guidelines (e.g., in Expansion of Abbreviation Including Symbol/Characters) make ubiquitous use of the "type" attribute to gloss the glyph in question. Although the "type" attribute is legal in TEI, nowhere in the TEI Guidelines do we find such usage; rather, the TEI envisions the use of a "ref" attribute, containing an IDREF for a <glyph> element somewhere else in the file or document collection wherein the glyph is defined. Should EpiDoc revise usage guidance and XSLT processing to better align itself with what seems to be normative TEI practice? </glyph></g>

Related

Request Features: ~~#81~~

Discussion

1 2 > >> (Page 1 of 2)

Tom Elliott - 2014-11-20

there was a decision taken on markup about this a year or so ago that we should move to using @ref and <glyph> as per TEI. Need to connect these dots and make changes happen.</glyph>

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2014-11-20

status: unread --> accepted

assigned_to: Tom Elliott
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2014-11-20

labels: guidelines and xslts --> guidelines and xslts, dclp
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2014-11-21

GB reminded me that this was discussed on markup long ago, but never implemented. Here are the relevant threads I've found:

Glyphs, Symbols, and Alternate Letter Forms December 14, 2011 ff.

Glyph Variants Redux November 1, 2010 ff.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2014-11-21

summary: Is the use of @type on <g> idiosyncratic? --> deprecate idiosyncratic @type on <g> and use @ref and <glyph></glyph></g></g>
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2014-11-21

This will drive changes to schema, Guidelines, XSLT and could have implications for legacy projects. We will need a plan.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2014-11-21

labels: guidelines and xslts, dclp --> guidelines and xslts, dclp, schema

summary: deprecate idiosyncratic @type on <g> and use @ref and <glyph> --> Is the use of @type on <g> idiosyncratic?</g></glyph></g>
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2014-11-21

summary: Is the use of @type on <g> idiosyncratic? --> deprecate idiosyncratic @type on <g> and use @ref and <glyph></glyph></g></g>
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Pietro Maria Liuzzo - 2014-11-24

we should definitely make a plan to what the ref points at at. Should we have a complete and comprehensive list somewhere for everyone? in the stylesheets there are actually lists from individual projects which could be a start.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2015-04-30

Group: Next_Release_(example) --> 8.20
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2015-05-08

This is too complex to accomplish in time for 8.21. Moving to the "future" milestone.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2015-05-08

Group: 8.21 --> future
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2016-07-19

Priority: 5(medium) --> 7
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2016-07-19

This has implications for guidance, xslt, testing, project compatibility. Raising the priority for future work, but leaving for future because too big for 8.22.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2016-09-20

Group: future --> 8.23
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2016-09-20

assigned_to: Tom Elliott --> nobody

Group: 8.23 --> future
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2016-09-20

status: accepted --> unread

assigned_to: Polina Yordanova
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2016-09-20

Poli will convene a sprint to discuss taking this issue forward.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2016-09-20

Group: future --> 8.23
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2016-11-15

Group: 8.23 --> future
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2016-11-15

Poli will convene a sprint on this topic, but probably not with a view to completing before the Feb 2017 release.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Tom Elliott - 2017-03-30

:ping:

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2017-03-31

status: unread --> pending

Group: future --> 8.24

Priority: 7 --> 8
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2017-03-31

Decisions to be made/raised on Markup:

what should default location of target of g/@ref be? (Glyph in header, project-specific authority list, EpiDoc-curated authority list, external (e.g. EAGLE) vocabulary...?)

do we still allow g/@type fallback, or eventually deprecate?

what behavior should be expected by Example Stylesheets, and therefore documented in Guidelines?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

BODARD Gabriel - 2017-10-17

Group: 8.24 --> 9.0
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

1 2 > >> (Page 1 of 2)

Log in to post a comment.