Dear Francois, dear all,
> <note type="incipit">The chapter starts on <locus>fol. 333</locus> with
> <q type="incipit">Hier hebet an</q>.</note>
> These semantically would be noted and quoted incipits which are not the
> same as the incipit proper (about which there was a thread in the last few
> months or so -- check the archives).
my question intended to get some feedback about the real encoding habits.
Unfortunately you were the only one to comment on my question but I estimate
that many people out there doing the encoding work -me included- use the
q-type=incipit-solution you have proposed. In our project we discussed the
possibilities and came to the opinion that the use of the "proper" <incipit>
would be preferable to the q-type.
If there are more TEI-ers who prefer to use <incipit>, P5 would have to be
adjusted to allow <incipit> in more places than only inside of msItem.
<decoNote >and <p> would be such candidates.
But this question belongs to another one, which I already have tried to discuss
both on the list and on the sourceforge-site and got no answer:
The definition of msItem in P5 does not (really) allow for any of the two
solutions: <incipit> must not contain extra text and a <q> and <note> has to
appear in a place so far in the back of <msItem> where nobody would expect an
incipit. The content model of msItem is too strict, much more strict as the old
Can anyone explain to me the reasons for redefining the element?
So, I raise it again: Could we get back to the MASTER definition of the msItem
in P5? It said:
(locus?, ( author | respStmt | title |rubric | summary
|incipit | explicit | colophon
| textLang | q | decoNote
|bibl | listBibl | note | msItem )* )>
For if a stricter definition is wanted I had proposed the following:
<!ENTITY % msItem.content "locus?,
More comments are welcome, Torsten
Torsten Schassan (Projekt Handschriftendatenbank/MASTER)
Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel
Tel.: +49-5331-808-117, [log in to unmask]