You are, of course, correct. However, you can't automagically
determine what the abbreviation marker was by a script. (Well,
given a dictionary of abbreviations you might make a reasonable
_guess_) So I was just putting it at the site of the expanded
text so that someone could then edit the <am/> to make it
kosher. I somehow think it is vaguely better to indicate in the
abbreviated form that 'this is the place where the word is
abbreviated' demonstrated by that being where one expands it. I
was just suggesting that with a text using only <ex> elements in
words that one could get most of the way to a detailed <choice>.
This falls down even more outside a western european context of
course where the abbreviation marker may be completely separate
from the orthographic word for all I know.
On 18/07/17 20:44, Lou Burnard wrote:
> What on earth is that empty <am/> doing in your example James?
> If the source actually read exāple, the a-with a macron might
> be inside the <am> I suppose. Or did you mean to put a floating
> macron in there?
> Either way, I can hear Matthew Driscoll using the word "nutty".
> On 18/07/17 16:09, James Cummings wrote:
>> Hi Sebastiaan,
>> I would always wrap it in <expan> however this is probably
>> scriptable in XSLT from what you have, so it doesn't
>> necessarily need to be done by hand by the encoders. Indeed I
>> think it would be fairly straightforward to go from
>> At least for values of orthographic, whitespace/punctuation
>> separated words with no other markup in them. ;-)
>> On 18/07/17 15:44, Sebastiaan Verweij wrote:
>>> Dear all
>>> A brief question: I’m considering not using the <expan> tags
>>> while transcribing a large body of seventeenth century mss. I
>>> note that the TEI P5 guidelines give a range of examples for
>>> <ex>, which we will use, and it seems optional to surround
>>> the entire expanded word with the <expan> tags (to mark its
>>> boundaries in some way). E.g.,
>>> Our rationale is mainly around time saving, so I was
>>> wondering if you have a view on this in terms of TEI
>>> practice. Is there a good reason to retain <expan> if this
>>> will not add any functionality to our project? Have you
>>> omitted these tags in the past and wished you hadn’t? Thanks
>>> so much.
>>> Dr Sebastiaan Verweij
>>> Lecturer in Late-Medieval and Early Modern English Literature
>>> University of Bristol
>>> (+44) (0) 117 92 88090
Dr James Cummings, [log in to unmask]
Academic IT Services, University of Oxford