Menu
▾
▴
Re: [TEI-ontology-SIG] Nesting <taxonomy> in <category>
|
From: Øyvind E. <oyv...@il...> - 2015-11-26 12:05:16
|
Well, yes, in a way it makes sense. You need to discuss specificities about something in a way which is naturally done in a taxonomy, and in your case that something happens to be a category. But I do not see that taxonomy as a sub-taxonomy under the taxonomy of literary forms. It is a different taxonomy specifically working on the category ‘verse’. Surely these things could be handled by pointing out to the taxonomy from the category but that would change nothing. So yes, as far as I can see your example makes sense and the question is if TEI is supposed to handle such complex classification systems or if it is better to include some other formalism in the TEI document. All the best, Øyvind 19. nov. 2015 kl. 14:37 skrev Martin Holmes <mholmes@UVIC.CA>: > Hi Øyvind, > > That's a good question. I think if this change were to be made, the > description of category would have something added to it. The basic > meaning of a category wouldn't change, though. > > I'm still at the stage where I'm trying to figure out whether the idea > is completely mad or not. Does the use-case on the ticket make sense to > you? Or would you handle that a different way? > > Cheers, > Martin > > On 15-11-19 05:00 AM, Øyvind Eide wrote: >> Dear Martin, >> >> Just to try to understand what the meaning of a category is: in the >> short TEI prose in the element list it says: >> >> <category> contains an individual descriptive category, possibly >> nested within a superordinate category, within a user-defined >> taxonomy. >> >> Given that you get acceptance for 2: that would mean that category >> would change its description, right? Or do you see a taxonomy fitting >> into something which “contains an individual descriptive category”? >> That is, can an individual category include a taxonomy (which is a >> typology)? >> >> Not sure if this clears or muddles the water but… >> >> Øyvind >> >> 1. nov. 2015 kl. 11:19 skrev Martin Holmes <mholmes@UVIC.CA>: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Thank you Christian-Emil for a well-organized and helpful SIG >>> meeting at the conference in Lyon. >>> >>> I have a ticket relating to ontologizing which I would like to run >>> by the experts in this group. It originally consisted of two >>> proposals: >>> >>> 1. <taxonomy> should be able to nest, because taxonomies include >>> other taxonomies; and >>> >>> 2. <taxonomy> should be available in <category>. >>> >>> The first proposal was fairly uncontroversial and I've now got >>> approval from Council and carried it out (the change will be in the >>> next release of P5). However, the second proposal is, I know, >>> rather different, and I have promised to get some more input from >>> people who really know about ontologizing to see whether my notions >>> are completely mad, or perhaps make some sense. I've raised a new >>> ticket for this, which presents my argument from a simple >>> use-case: >>> >>> <https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/issues/1356> >>> >>> Can I ask members of this SIG to take a look and give some feedback >>> on this? >>> >>> All the best, Martin >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> Tei-ontology-sig mailing list >>> Tei...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tei-ontology-sig >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> Tei-ontology-sig mailing list Tei...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tei-ontology-sig >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Tei-ontology-sig mailing list > Tei...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tei-ontology-sig |