I too wondered about this, and more generally I have wondered about
the reasons why some elements have type attributes and others don't.
Is it a set of ad hoc decisions or is there a set of principles that
establishes the classes of elements with and without type.
On Oct 17, 2007, at 7:12 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
> Torsten Schassan wrote:
>> Can anybody remind me of why <q> has @type while <quote> has not?
>> What can I do if I want to quote from a manuscript and express
>> that the
>> quotation is one of a certain kind? E.g. if the quotation in fact
>> is an
>> incipit but as quotation appears at a place where <incipit> is not
>> allowed. When we "were allowed" to use <q> this would have been <q
>> type="incipit"> but what now?
>> Best, Torsten
> I'm puzzled. If the quotation is an incipit, and it appears at a
> place where incipit isn't allowed, something is wrong somewhere.
> Can you give us an example?
> Adding @type to <quote> is not difficult of course, but I would
> rather solve the other problem and allow you to use a more
> meaningful markup!