The proposal as currently stated has two parts.
1) introduction of new elements
2) elimination of existing elements
The group that has been working on bibliographic entries for TEI
proposes that <biblStruct> with its children <analytic>, <monogr>, and
<series> be replaced by two new elements: <biblItem> and
Does the introduction require the elimination?
I ask because the TEI Guidelines offer <bibl>, <biblStruct> and
<biblFull>. The proposal in its current form focuses upon <biblStruct>.
Were other options considered? If so what were the pros and cons of
focussing upon <biblStruct> to the exclusion of <bibl> or <biblFull>?
I ask because there may be other ways to accomodate the desired objective
which, is I believe to find ways of encoding relations between
bibliographic elements. Although I hesitate to ascribe this objective to
the proposal since I'm not sure because the purpose seems to be couched in
the language of structures:
This new structure would bring TEI bibliographic representation closer in
line with recent library developments, such as the Metadata Object
Description Schema (MODS) from the Library of Congress. The proposed
relatedBiblItem element would be structurally equivalent to the
<relatedItem> element in MODS, which is itself influenced by relator
structures in Dublin Core.
I ask this question because it appears to me that the examples used to
present the proposal assume that relationship is best encoded through
nesting of elements. Can the purpose of the proposal be narrowed to the
question: how best to encode bibliographic records so that the
relationships between bibliographic elements are represented by nesting?
In short, the consideration of the proposal raises two related questions :
the ontology of relationships to be encoded and the form of representation
best suited to encoding those relationships.
I stress the ontology question. It could very well be that what is aimed
at is not necessarily a listing of bibliographic entries gathered in a
<listBibl> element but a list of <cit> elements. What looks like a
bibliographic record could conceivably be approached from and encoding
perspective as a citation especially if the objective is to capture
-- Francois Lachance, Scholar-at-large http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~lachance
A calendar is like a map. And just as maps have insets, calendars in the
21st century might have 'moments' expressed in flat local time fanning out
into "great circles" expressed in earth revolution time.