It seems to me that this ambiguity is part of the text, not part of
the encoding--if one encountered such a text, one would need a way to
encode it, and this would be the correct way. The question of whether
the larger role description overrides the more specific one is a
problem for the reader, not the encoder--it doesn't go away even if
we pretend that "Gentlemen of leisure" is not a role description, and
it doesn't intensify even if we acknowledge that it is.
Lou Burnard wrote:
>The problem with this approach is that there are now two different
>places where the <roleDesc> can be specified -- either within the
><castGroup> or within the <castItem>. How then is one to interpret (say)
> <roleDesc>a man about town</roleDesc>
> <roleDesc>a child of fortune</roleDesc>
>Gentlemen of leisure
>Is Itchy *both* a "gentlemen of leisure" *and* "a man about town"? Or
>does the inner (or outer) description over-ride the other one?
>Of course, you can always define a usage rule to help resolve such
>conundrums, but the existing definitions need modification in such a case.