I should have been more precise: Having decided that the group of two
cast items should be encoded as a <castGroup>, I was therefore on a path
at whose end lies <trailer> rather than (what I think would be more
appropriate) <roleDesc>. The reason I didn't encode the <roleDesc>
inside one of the <castItem>s is that it belongs to both.
Structually, the situation looks to me like two cast items grouped
together by a common role description, which I would like to represent
And this seems to me to be a reasonable encoding. I wonder whether
anyone else thinks that adding <roleDesc> to the things that can appear
at the end of a <castGroup> would be a good idea?
I agree with the rest of your analysis--thank you!
Michael Beddow wrote:
>> and the to the right, the following role description (which TEI wants me
>> to encode as a trailer, though I suggest that <roleDesc> would be better):
> Where does this TEI-want come from? <roleDesc> is a permissible child of
> <castItem>, and doubtless intentionally so. Of course, if you close
> <castItem> immediately after <role>, as in your example, then you are
> indeed stuck with <trailer>. But it needn't be so.