Kevin Hawkins gave a talk about "FRBR Group 1 Entities and the TEI Guidelines“ back in 2008: http://www.ultraslavonic.info/preprints/20081102.pdf
This is backing Patrick’s not so idiosyncratic view ;)
> Am 20.03.2015 um 10:04 schrieb Arianna Ciula <[log in to unmask]>:
> All agreed Patrick but whether it is common sense I am not that sure. This is why I keep showing your wheel all the time... because it is a useful analytical tool to see the TEI from a wider perspective.
> The wider aim of - say - a TEI/FRBRoo working group would not be about finding one ontology for all but rather a possible attempt at plotting standards around different understandings of what text is (for the encoder, the specific project or school, within a context), and getting those who seat close in that wheel or who even overlap talk to each other. We don't have to agree on one perspective but if we could map equivalences within certain domains I think it would be beneficial for the community of users - not only developers of the standards - at large.
> Sent from my iPhone
> On 20 Mar 2015, at 08:46, Patrick Sahle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> to narrow the discussion further down to single aspects ...
>> Am 17.03.2015 um 11:14 schrieb Fabio Ciotti:
>>>> 5.) most interesting: TEI and other models of text.
>>>> a) surely TEI, its basic structure and most single elements can be mapped to
>>>> the basic entities in FRBR more or less precisely. But I assume that there
>>>> is already a BA/MA thesis, a blog entry or a research article on this out
>>> Maybe, but imho that would (work) and would be useful only for the
>>> metadata layer of TEI (aka TEIHeader)
>> Maybe I have a different understanding of some basic FRBR entities. As I don't see them restricted to metadata description but as general ontological categories for talking about text.
>> I would say, that probably most aspects of FRBR-work are dealt with in the TEIHeader. But don't we have the FRBR-expression and FRBR-manifestation themselves in <text>? And while FRBR-item can regard physical aspects as in <physDesc> in the header, to me it means as well things that are encoded within the transcription.
>> some examples:
>> <title type="desc"> can be on the FRBR-work layer
>> <p> can be on the FRBR-expression or the manifestation layer
>> <lb> is usually on the FRBR-manifestation layer
>> <sic> can be considered to be on the FRBR-manifestation or FRBR-item layer
>> <note type="gloss" place="margin"> is usually on the FRBR-item layer
>> <gap> can be used on the FRBR-item layer ("the material is illegible, invisible, or inaudible")
>> Is this just common sense or am I completely idiosyncratic here?
>> Best, Patrick