I'd say this is pointless, unless you have a research interest in
precisely this phenomenon (meaning of highlighted text). There are a few
simple cases, like <title> and <foreign>, and these might be useful for
searching. Your examples could perhaps be argued to be <mentioned> (as I
see now Julia does for the first one).
But in any text, there are a million things that are of semantic
interest of which we do not try to capture the meaning at the encoding
stage (such as: choice of words, word order, etc.). Why then should we
have to capture every shade of significance in the case of highlighted
I'd stick to <hi> for these cases and not feel very guilty about it.
Jon Noring wrote:
> I've been studying the TEI elements for marking up the semantics of
> highlighted text (avoid using <hi>). Chapter 6 of the TEI P4X spec
> provides the "core" overview.
> Yet, I am finding it difficult to come up with a "standardized"
> uniform approach that will work on most if not all highlighted inline
> text I run across in contemporary books. As I go through a catalog of
> recently published books, I'm always finding a few oddities that are
> somewhat difficult to semantically categorize, either because they
> occupy some "gray" area, or are simply difficult to semantically
> characterize to standard TEI elements.
> So, has anyone here come up with a workable set of standardized
> guidelines for this purpose? I would think that some projects to
> markup a lot of books in TEI would try to standardize their approach
> to semantically markup highlighted text.
> Or is this an exercise in futility? <laugh/>
> As an example, here's just a couple snippets where I'd like to
> properly assign TEI semantics to the italicized text:
> It took a few minutes and a couple of us to figure it out, but we
> determined there are three letters carved in her skin: <i>CXJ</i>.
> It was almost certain she would be voted <i>best-looking senior</i>
> in the class of ‘02 at her Cocoa Beach high school next year.
> Thanks for your insights!
> Jon Noring