Have you considered using XInclude to include the existing remarks from
the TEI source along with your own? Then you can decide what sequence
they go in.
On 2016-07-22 10:41 AM, Gioele Barabucci wrote:
> Am 22.07.2016 um 17:18 schrieb Lou Burnard:
>> That's the way things are, and usually (I think) that's what most people
>> want. If you're providing new examples, you probably don't want to see
>> the old ones -- they probably use elements that aren't in your schema.
>> If you're providing a new set of remarks, you're in principle rejecting
>> the original ones.
> Please leave the decision of rejecting them to me. :) If I wanted to
> reject them I would not be using TEI. At least in my experience, all I
> want to do is adding additional constraints or notes. Almost all of them
> start in the same way: "In addition to what the TEI guidelines say,
> remember to do also..."
>> If you were able to "modify" the existing <remarks> etc. where would you
>> expect your additions to come? At the start, or the end? Would you like
>> to change every reference to foo to read tei:foo? Und so weiter.
>> And of course, you can have multiple <remarks> in different languages,
>> so which ones are you modifying?
> I understand this point of view. But then I have the ability to add an
> attribute or an element with `@mode="add"`. Where will they be shown in
> the HTML? Before or after the other attributes/elements? Who knows? But
> is it that important? I'd say that the ability to easily base (and
> rebase) a schema over TEI is more important.