The question was raised as to whether EpiDoc should be recommending "London" usage for persName and name--consensus is yes. We should revisit the guidelines to make it much more detailed and explicit. Suggestions are good because they help to encourage consistency (indexing in EFES will be more straightforward, for example); suggestions are also not obligatory, and more or less detail are both possible in individual cases. Further examples of Roman, Greek, Celtic and other types of names would all be useful.
(Linking to SNAP worth a mention?)
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
An example from Vernacular inscriptions project. They simply choose that there is no reason to distinguish at the moment and add @type. They simply mark names and persName and index those.
The London usage of @type includes the values: attested, emperor, divine, consular, ruler, other; the distinction between 'ruler' and 'consular' being that we normally tag any local ruler/king mentioned in the text in any capacity as @type="ruler", and 'consular' is used only for consuls/archons/priests who are mentioned as part of the dating formula. It all depends on how we want to index the mentioned people and what we unltimatley want to do with them but that has been the categorisation used so far.
Now, 'consular' doesn't really apply to anything outside of Roman context, so Scott suggested changing it to 'eponymous'. (Also, it looks like only IRCyr uses it. IAph and IRT don't.)
Another option is to approach the concept differently, not as a type of person or of their name but as a person's role. So then we might have a reccommended list of values for @role instead of @type, which seems more rational for what these words signify in terms of their role in the text. For example:
@role=attestation
@role=political
@role=dating
@role=religious ("cult"?)
...
Thoughts?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Gabby will write to the Markup list summarising the London/USEP usage of persName and name, and ask if anyone objects to that becoming EpiDoc recommendation.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The question was raised as to whether EpiDoc should be recommending "London" usage for persName and name--consensus is yes. We should revisit the guidelines to make it much more detailed and explicit. Suggestions are good because they help to encourage consistency (indexing in EFES will be more straightforward, for example); suggestions are also not obligatory, and more or less detail are both possible in individual cases. Further examples of Roman, Greek, Celtic and other types of names would all be useful.
(Linking to SNAP worth a mention?)
An example from Vernacular inscriptions project. They simply choose that there is no reason to distinguish at the moment and add @type. They simply mark names and persName and index those.
The London usage of @type includes the values: attested, emperor, divine, consular, ruler, other; the distinction between 'ruler' and 'consular' being that we normally tag any local ruler/king mentioned in the text in any capacity as @type="ruler", and 'consular' is used only for consuls/archons/priests who are mentioned as part of the dating formula. It all depends on how we want to index the mentioned people and what we unltimatley want to do with them but that has been the categorisation used so far.
Now, 'consular' doesn't really apply to anything outside of Roman context, so Scott suggested changing it to 'eponymous'. (Also, it looks like only IRCyr uses it. IAph and IRT don't.)
Another option is to approach the concept differently, not as a type of person or of their name but as a person's role. So then we might have a reccommended list of values for @role instead of @type, which seems more rational for what these words signify in terms of their role in the text. For example:
@role=attestation
@role=political
@role=dating
@role=religious ("cult"?)
...
Thoughts?
Gabby to write to Markup list with some history of past decisions and add current proposition.
Gabby will write to the Markup list summarising the London/USEP usage of persName and name, and ask if anyone objects to that becoming EpiDoc recommendation.
Postponed until discussion on Markup.
Discussion on Markup kicked off with an email at https://lsv.uky.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=MARKUP;9e906fd3.2001
Will report back if there is any useful consensus, and/or volunteers to help write the Guidelines.
No objections. Gabby will implement in Guidelines.
I intend to implement this in time for the next release. Assigning to milestone accordingly.