LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for TEI-L Archives


TEI-L Archives

TEI-L Archives


TEI-L@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TEI-L Home

TEI-L Home

TEI-L  May 2015

TEI-L May 2015

Subject:

Re: Postmarks in correspondence

From:

Peter Stadler <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Peter Stadler <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 2 May 2015 20:45:35 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (102 lines)

Yes, exactly!
The (new) correspDesc element shall be used for encoding the communicative aspect of correspondence while the material aspect(s) are to be encoded within sourceDesc. Thus, correspDesc does not revolutionize the encoding of letters but adds one facet we believed was missing.

Best
Peter

> Am 30.04.2015 um 23:00 schrieb Elisa Beshero-Bondar <[log in to unmask]>:
> 
> Dear TEI list,
> As I'm reading about correspDesc (see http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/HD.html#HD44CD ), the focus seems to be on a concise compilation of metadata to describe the initiator, recipient and dates associated with an act of correspondence. It does not seem to be about describing the physical marks on a letter, such as the shapes and positions of postal marks or the presence and appearance of wax seals. Within correspDesc, it seems to me the markup would indicate simply the metadata gleaned from our reading of the surface marks, not a description of the surface marks themselves.
> 
> Thus, if I were to answer my own question, I'd say, I think I ought to leave all that physical stuff I posted in my previous message right where it is in <sourceDesc>, and sum up information about the letter in the correspDesc. Is that the right answer?
> 
> Thanks,
> Elisa
> 
> .
> 
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Elisa Beshero-Bondar <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Michael and list,
> Here's how we're handling postmarks and wax seals and such for 19th-century letters in the Digital Mitford project. They're not always clear or consistent, so it's difficult to deal with them in a granular way, as you indicate!
> 
> As a followup question: Would the wisdom of the list suggest I should move this information into the profileDesc, to sit in correspDesc? We could move all this from <sourcDesc> to <profileDesc> with a batch transformation.
> 
> Anyway, this will show you our thinking on how to handle the complexities of postmarks and seals--and I'd love some feedback!
> 
> Thanks,
> Elisa Beshero-Bondar
> 
> 
>  <sourceDesc>
>           <msDesc>
>                   <msIdentifier>
>                <respository ref="#Rylands">The John Rylands University Library</repository>
>                    <collection><!--Letter is a part of which collection or volume of letters?-->
> Mitford-Talfourd Correspondence: Letters from Mary Russell Mitford to Thomas Noon Talfourd: vol. 665</collection>
>                      <idno><!--Enter MS number or shelfmark here→-> qB/TU/MIT</idno>
>                 </msIdentifier>
> 
> <head>Letter from Mary Russell Mitford to T.N. Talfourd, <date when="1822-08-13">1822 August 13</date>.<note resp="#lmw"><persName ref="#MRM">MRM</persName> dates this letter <date>August 13</date> and it is posted on <date>the 14th</date>.</note><!--ebb: Put an editorial note here when we need to explain how we arrived at this date. We could reference Coles, L'Estrange, or others here, too, if it helps to authenticate date, recipient, etc.--></head>
> </head>
>            <physDesc>
>                <objectDesc>
>                           <supportDesc>
>                        <support>
>    <p><material>Paper</material> with watermark in form of <watermark>anchor</watermark> visible on second sheet.</p>
> <p>How many distinct sheets of paper do you count in this letter (as opposed to the number of pages--usually 4--marked on the fronts and backs and over folds)? Indicate number of sheets, and size of sheets, whether this is a fragment, and if so what appears to be missing. Two sheets of quarto-post folded in thirds twice. OR octavo-post OR 16-mo post, folded once or twice, etc. (If you can’t tell what size paper this is b/c you’re working with a photo or just don’t know, you can simply say, one large sheet, with a half-size smaller sheet inside, etc.)
> Describe any watermarks here, and on what sheets they appear.
> Envelope present, or only an address leaf?
> [EXAMPLE]:  Folded in thirds twice: one sheet of quarto-post containing pages 1, 2, 5 and 6, and one sheet of half quarto post containing pages 3 and 4. Watermark in form of <watermark>unicorn</watermark> visible on page three </p>
> <p>Describe stamps or postal marks here.
> It'll help to look at our slides on how to identify the different stamps: http://digitalmitford.wordpress.com/2014/05/27/the-digital-mitfords-guide-to-19th-century-british-postmarks-and-how-to-code-them-in-tei/
> 
> Use the <lb/> element to indicate what’s above and below if needed. Envelope bearing large stamped date inside circle reading <date when="1818-04-20"><stamp>April 20<lb/>1818</stamp></date> above right of address. Address leaf bearing sepia-inked stamp reading <stamp><time>7 o'Clock</time><lb/><date>29 * JU</date> <lb/><date>1820</date> N. <unclear><gap quantity="1" unit="chars" reason="illegible"/></unclear></stamp> at top left-hand edge upside down in relation to the writing of the address.</p>
> </support>
> <condition><p>Comment on the condition: is the letter damaged, signs of mold? Example: A portion of page 3 has been torn away under the seal.</p></condition>
> </supportDesc>
> 
>                 </objectDesc>
>                    <sealDesc>
>                             <p>Is there a seal on this letter? Describe it. Red oval-shaped wax seal with diagonal line, and at the bottom lettering <q>anders</q>. Or indicate here if the seal is missing.</p>
>        </sealDesc>
> 
>        </physDesc>
> 
>          </msDesc>
>   </sourceDesc>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Michael Hawkins <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'm currently in the middle of updating a bunch of transcripts of manuscript correspondence to take advantage of correspDesc. However, I'm having problems figuring out how to deal with postmarks. Does anyone on the list have any suggestions on how they could be encoded? Unfortunately, our postmarks aren't currently encoded with a great deal of granularity. It isn't feasible (right now) to tease out the separate bits of information on places, dates, etc so that might limit the options a bit.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> Michael Hawkins
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD
> Associate Professor of English
> University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg
> Humanities Division
> 150 Finoli Drive
> Greensburg, PA  15601  USA
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> about.me/ebbondar
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD
> Associate Professor of English
> University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg
> Humanities Division
> 150 Finoli Drive
> Greensburg, PA  15601  USA
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> about.me/ebbondar

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
January 1995
December 1994
November 1994
October 1994
September 1994
August 1994
July 1994
June 1994
May 1994
April 1994
March 1994
February 1994
January 1994
December 1993
November 1993
October 1993
September 1993
August 1993
July 1993
June 1993
May 1993
April 1993
March 1993
February 1993
January 1993
December 1992
November 1992
October 1992
September 1992
August 1992
July 1992
June 1992
May 1992
April 1992
March 1992
February 1992
January 1992
December 1991
November 1991
October 1991
September 1991
August 1991
July 1991
June 1991
May 1991
April 1991
March 1991
February 1991
January 1991
December 1990
November 1990
October 1990
September 1990
August 1990
July 1990
June 1990
April 1990
March 1990
February 1990
January 1990

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager