<head> represents a heading for the thing that contains it, which is why
it's always given as its first child. Your first example below is not
permissible, because the second <head> is contained directly by the
<div>, and the div already has a heading. Your second example is legal:
the first <head> is the heading for the whole div (though not for the
first stanza), and the second <head> is the heading for the second stanza.
In the case you describe, is the title a title for the whole poem or a
title for the second (or first) div only? If the former, I cannot see
how you distinguish it from a running title; if the latter, it belongs
inside the div.
I agree with you that the description for <lg> is a bit misleading in
the sense that it doesn't refer to the possibility of including a
heading though.
On 06/05/11 18:19, Robert Whalen wrote:
> I've been away but wanted to follow up on an earlier thread.
>
> Why is this,
>
> <div>
> <head/>
> <lg>
> <l/>
> </lg>
> <head/>
> <lg>
> <l/>
> </lg>
> </div>,
>
> not permissible, whereas this,
>
> <div>
> <head/>
> <lg>
> <l/>
> </lg>
> <lg>
> <head/>
> <l/>
> </lg>
> </div>,
>
> is?
>
> I've a two-stanza poem, on a recto-verso opening, in which the title
> appears over both stanzas. It is not, for the second stanza, a running
> title in the same sense as that which appears on the top of the page
> (the poem title appearing on both pages about a quarter of the way down,
> below the section running title at the top), but rather an exact
> duplicate of <head/>.
>
> The Guidelines say that <lg/> " contains a group of verse lines
> functioning as a formal unit, e.g. a stanza, refrain, verse paragraph,
> etc." Surely the title or <head/> does not fit within that description?
> Why not just allow multiple <head/>s within a single <div/>?
>
> Robert Whalen
|
