Yeah, I mean what he says! (What a great generalisation). I was looking
at feature structures in a model way rather than as a specific element.
The point was that langusage really could be seen as a specialised
feature structure-type element.
On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 10:47 -0700, Martin Holmes wrote:
> I fall rather in the middle on this one. I understand exactly what Dan
> means, but I take the point that language is perhaps not the perfect
> analogue. Generically, this is the kind of thing we're talking about:
> <descriptionOfThing xml:id="ThingID">
> <div associateWith="ThingID">
> The pattern is that something is described in the header (maybe by means
> of a feature description, maybe using other tags such as creatorApp, but
> with a unique ID) and then elements elsewhere in the document are
> associated with it by means of an attribute pointing to the ID value.
> The pattern is useful for all sorts of different types of item, from
> linguistic feature structures to creatorApp. I think Dan's actually
> using the term "feature structure" in a general sense, rather than
> referring to fsd and fs elements.
> Lou Burnard wrote:
> > Dan O'Donnell wrote:
> >> b) For Lou: in addition to what Martin said about the tool att, the idea
> >> came up I think in a discussion of how a creation app might be
> >> conceptually similar to langusage, which is itself a type of feature
> >> structure, I think.
> > I beg to differ.
> > A language, an application which creates something, a linguistic
> > structure, or indeed a kettle of old socks might all be *described* by
> > means of a feature structure. That is because a feature structure is a
> > generic method of representing interpretations as named feature-value
> > pairs organized in various ways. It does not mean that the things a fs
> > describes are *types* of feature structure.
> > I.e. a place for identifying properties that can be
> >> referred to elsewhere by ID:
> > This is a very restrictive definition of a feature structure! The TEI
> > feature structure representation *uses* the id/idref mechanism inherited
> > from SGML for economy of representation. It is by no means an essential
> > part of it.
> >> In this case, I think the creationapp proposal seems to lie between
> >> langusage and revisionDesc in syntax and function.
> > I don't know what dimension you are plotting these things along, but I
> > think they have very little to do with each other. One is about the
> > languages used in a text (and note that it is redundant for most
> > documents come P5). The other is about what happened in the process of
> > creating the document. Their syntax is identical -- they both use XML.
> > Their functions are as different as chalk and cheese.
> >> -d
Daniel Paul O'Donnell, PhD
Acting Chair and Associate Professor of English
Director, Digital Medievalist Project
University of Lethbridge
Lethbridge AB T1K 3M4
Vox: +1 (403) 329-2378/-2377
Fax: +1 (403) 382-7191