please allow me to return to the problem with the
"reg"-attribute/-element in P5 presented by Daniel Roewenstrunk and
Peter Stadler a few days ago.
I see the advantages of a "reg"-element in P5, but I wonder why this
change from an attribute in P4 to an element in P5 is considered as such
a strict and one-way-change in the case of the "person"- or
"persName"-context but not in connection with other elements. As far as
I see, we may further use the attribute "reg" in connection e. g. with
the elements "country", "orgTitle", "orgName", "orgType", "org*",
"nationality" - but not in the context of "person" or "placeName". For
my small ears, this sounds a little inconsequent!
We do indeed use the "key"-attribute to refer to a database which
contains detailed personal data of those persons which are mentioned in
our source-text. But we had until now (as many people who used P4) an
additional "reg"-attribute in order to give the "register-entry" for a
person in the context oft the source-text itself, an entry which may
easily be visualized for the reader (without refering to data outside
the TEI-file) and proved to be very helpful in daily work. In this case
there is no necessity for tagging with additional formatting devices -
so the attribute is absolutely sufficient for our purpose. So: why
should we change all our files in this area? (naturally: in order to use
the much better P5...).
My question is: Why has the reg-attribute been so strictly eliminated? I
think it may be more flexible for many people if we had the possibilty
to do it in the new way of P5 (i. e. as "element") or "more
traditionally" with the "attribute"-version. So why not including a
"reg"-attribute (as it is further allowed for "country", "org'" etc.)?
It is clear that it would be nonsense to use "reg"-element and attribute
at the same time in the same context - but we have a lot of similar
problems where you have to decide which way of encoding is the best one
for your special purpose (without leading to a "mixed" or better:
Does anyone understand our "problem" or are we the only people pleading
for a more flexible way of dealing with the "reg"-story?
I look forward to any help and my small ears are intensively listening
in the e-mail-airwaves,
Musikwiss. Seminar Detmold/Paderborn, Gartenstrasse 20, D-32756 Detmold