Dear Richard and Tei,
What is better than sitting in our separate rooms/lobbys/cafes in the
same city discussing these things :-)
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 12:20:30PM +0000, Richard Light wrote:
> In message <[log in to unmask]>, Lou Burnard
> <[log in to unmask]> writes
> >It's true that TEI currently has nothing for <ship>s and requires you
> >to use <org> (<orgName>, <rs type="org">) for families, institutions,
> >peoples, or collectives. Though obviously generic elements like <name>
> >and <rs> can be used for them.
> The discussion on this topic possibly points up the lack of a coherent
> ontology of things-referred-to. Ships, for example, can be seen (at
> least in one sense) as a sub-class of objects. The CIDOC CRM springs to
> mind as a potential organising principle. This is possibly an area that
> the Ontologies SIG could look into?
Yes. I think we will discuss what to do with objects referred to in
TEI documents on Saturday, and we plan for something written to come
out of that.
In addition, with my Univ. of Oslo hat on, we will have a meeting in
two weeks time about registers of ships made by happy amatours, of
which a plan for TEI encoding of the documentation may very well be an
By the way, there are no strict definition of what a name actually is
in the guidelines, right?
"<name> (name, proper noun) contains a proper noun or noun phrase."
...English is not my mother language, but according to the decription
above, may not a description be seen as a name? "The green house at
/ Kind regards,
/ Řyvind Eide, Unit for Digital Documentation, University of Oslo
| Postal adr.: P.O. Box 1123 Blindern, N-0317 OSLO, Norway
\ Phone: + 47 22 85 49 88 Fax: + 47 22 85 49 83