Ron Van Den Branden wrote:
>> So I agree with Peter that it makes good sense to treat individual texts
>> in a miscellany, or individual charters in a cartulary, as distinct
>> texts. In the same way, I would advocate treating separate poems in a
>> collection of poems as texts, not divs.
> For the encoding of the complete works of a 16th century Flemish poetess, I
> am considering to going even further:
> * treat every poem as <TEI> document
> * treat every bundle as a <teiCorpus> element, including the poems with
> entity references
I am not sure that I understand correctly what you mean by "bundle". Is
a bundle a specific manuscript or early edition, for example?
If so, it would make sense to treat each one as a distinct <TEI>
element, with its own header, and a degree of autonomy. If it contains
its own front and back matter, that would be represented within the
outermost <text>; if it contains multiple poems or other things they
would be represented within a <group> which would replace the <body> of
the outermost text. See the discussion of <group> in the Guidelines for
Then you can have a whole bunch of those inside a <teiCorpus>.
The mapping of all this structure to system entities (files etc) is a
different matter however.
Or have I completely misunderstood the problem?
> This strategy is informed by the desire to assign every poem a high level of
> autonomy, so that
> 1) poems can be transcribed and thus validated as unitary texts
> 2) poems that come in different versions in different bundles / manuscript
> collections can in a later phase more easily be collated against each other
> However, I am stumbling into problems with non-poem contents of bundles,
> like title pages, prefatory matter, back matter. There doesn't seem to be an
> option to encode <front> and <back> matter for an entire corpus. The only
> thing I can think of within standard TEI, is to encode e.g. the title page,
> table of contents,... as well as separate <TEI> documents, but then this has
> to be done as <body> content. This does not seem very satisfactory if not
> straight TEI-abuse. Or would it make sense to give up the <teiCorpus>
> approach for the bundles, and instead encode every bundle as <TEI> element,
> containing <group> elements in which links are encoded to the relevant poem
> <text> parts?
> Does anyone have a better suggestion to deal with either
> 1) front / back matter at <teiCorpus> level
> 2) the encoding of the same texts at different levels (as autonomous texts
> AND parts of a bundle)
> Those would be greatly appreciated,