On 12-01-07 10:42 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
> On 07/01/12 18:25, Martin Holmes wrote:
>> The nested tag overrides the outer tag. This is what would happen with
>> CSS. Depending on your aims, though, you might code it differently (with
>> two outer subscript tags and an inner superscript which isn't contained
>> by either).
> OK, so (for you) this is a case where the values of @rend are understood
> to be non-combinable: if it's super, it can't also be sub, just like the
> other example discussed on this thread ( "roman" and "italic").
Exactly. If there are shades of vertical displacement, then you would
use a different terminology; RTF, for example, uses \up6 to mean
vertical displacement upwards by six points, and \dn2 to mean down by
two points. If this kind of approach were used, you'd expect the effect
to be combining.
> Sebastian's original question concerned a case where the values *can* be
> combined. (If the inner value is "bold" and the outer value is "italic",
> it is plausible to read this as meaning "bold italic", rather than just
>> I think you have to ask yourself: if the contents of the inner tag were
>> not superscript, what on earth could the tag mean?
> Say what? the inner tag's meaning could be several things ... it might
> mean "apply superscripting to a subscripted number" (thus producing
> something which is neither sub nor super), it could mean "ERROR ERROR
> SUBSCRIPTS MAY NOT BE SUPERSCRIPTED"
Well, technically it couldn't _mean_ the latter; it might be trapped as
an error, and generate that error message. But I think you'd probably
agree that an approach such as the former would be confusing.
> Imagine a rendition system (such as LaTeX) in which we have relative
> values like "bigger" or "smaller". What would<hi rend="bigger"> xxx
> <hi rend="bigger"> yyy</hi> zzz</hi> mean? Does it mean that the inner
> <hi> is redundant? or does it mean that the yyy is to be rendered bigger
> than the xxx and the zzz, both of which are bigger than the default? If
> you think the latter, then what would it mean if the inner "bigger" were
> a "smaller"?
That's basically what I was saying above.
> I suppose all I'm saying here is what we already know: the semantics of
> the values for @rend are underspecified.
That's another strong argument for the use of CSS in @rend. We know what
CSS means, and how it cascades.
>> On 12-01-06 04:20 PM, Lou Burnard wrote:
>>> ok, so what does<tei:hi rend="subscript">b,<tei:hi
>>> -- Sent from my HP TouchPad
>>> *From:* Martin Holmes<[log in to unmask]>
>>> *Date:* 6 Jan 2012 23:30
>>> *Subject:*Re: are @rend values on<hi> inherited?
>>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>>> Definitely yes. Unless an intervening tag explicitly undoes the
>>> subscripting, it stays in effect until its tag is closed. Any other
>>> behaviour would be completely unintuitive.
>>> On 12-01-06 01:23 AM, Laurent Romary wrote:
>>> > I would definitely say yes...
>>> > Le 6 janv. 2012 à 10:13, Sebastian Rahtz a écrit :
>>> >> I suspect I know what people will think, but let me try anyway.
>>> >> Does
>>> >> <tei:hi rend="subscript">b,<tei:hi rend="italic">i</tei:hi></tei:hi>;
>>> >> mean that the inner "i" is subscripted or not?
>>> >> --
>>> >> Stormageddon Rahtz
>>> >> Head of Information and Support Group, Oxford University Computing
>>> >> 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
>>> >> Sólo le pido a Dios
>>> >> que el futuro no me sea indiferente
>>> > Laurent Romary
>>> > INRIA& HUB-IDSL
>>> > [log in to unmask]