Hi James, hi Matthew,
thanks for the clarification, because this was new to me! Perhaps we
should adjust the note in the <biblScope> reference? Right now, it seems
for me, that the note is (regarding the difference to <citedRange>) a
little bit missunderstandig:
"When a single page is being cited, use the @from and @to attributes
with an identical value. When no clear endpoint is provided, the @from
attribute should be used without @to. For example, if the citation has
‘p. 3ff’ as a page reference."
Perhaps we could make also a reference to the element <citedRange>?
Am 13.12.2016 um 12:19 schrieb James Cummings:
> On 13/12/16 11:09, MLH wrote:
>> Thanks James et al. I should have noticed that they were only
>> suggested values! 'entry' makes sense to me in this case although it
>> would be interesting to hear what other people have done.
>> re. Elisa's suggested about <biblScope>: my impression was that
>> <biblScope> and <citedRange> had rather different functions, the first
>> describing the pages (or whatever) occupied by a whole cited work
>> (e.g. chapter in a book), and the second describing the pages cited
>> from that work in a given reference. For example:
>> A. N. Other, "Example book section", in /Example Book/, <biblScope>pp.
>> 123-234</biblScope>, at <citedRange>pp. 125-6</citedRange>
> Hi Matthew,
> You are correct in your understanding. Some projects use biblScope where
> they should use citedRange because citedRange is a more recent addition
> to the TEI. It was first added in TEI P5 version 2.3.0
> in January 2013. Before this, biblScope sometimes did double duty to
> cope with cited ranges as well in some projects.
> (Just some history so people are reminded how much the TEI is a
> developing, community-based standard.)
> Those wanting this to be a suggested value... I've added an issue here
> on github:
> feel free to add your voice, clarifications, or objections there.
Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften
Tel.: 030 / 20370 -684
[log in to unmask]