Torsten Schassan wrote:
> How do you cope with the difference of a rubricated text not being a
> rubric/title and vice versa, a special portion of text signalling a text
> division not being set off from the text? Do you feel the need to distinguish
> meaning and appearence in these cases?
I would say in cases where rubricated text is not signalling a text
division or is not setting off a piece of text somehow, then it isn't a
rubric, and just text in red ink. In such a case I'd use <hi
rend="rubric"> to indicate that it was rendered so in the original.
> Or more general: how do you use the element <rubric> (think it should be used)?
>
>
> How about a definition of rubric that takes both perspectives into account:
>
> <!ATTLIST %n.rubric;
> %tei.global.attributes;
> rend (normal|rubricated|displayscript) #REQUIRED
> function (normal|rubric) #REQUIRED
> type CDATA #IMPLIED
> TEIform CDATA 'rubric' >
> ]]>
In the CURSUS project, we extended P4 to include a <rubric> element for
our encoding of liturgical texts. But this was used to indicate
specific types of heading, and had a 'type' attribute limited to those
kinds of rubric which we had come across. Really, this was just for
checking consistency, and had allowed values such as 'antiphon',
dayTitle, serviceTitle, lectionTitle, etc. We could have probably used
<head> with a similar type attribute for 90% of them.
-James
--
Ask me about free long-term preservation of your electronic texts!
Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford
James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk
|
