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:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TEI-L Home

TEI-L Home

TEI-L  October 2018

TEI-L October 2018

Subject:

Re: critical introduction

From:

Hugh Cayless <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Hugh Cayless <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 29 Oct 2018 08:35:38 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (85 lines)

In haste, sitting in a dentist’s chair. My own tendency is almost the opposite. I view the introductory material as a first-class part of the edition, and so would tend to put it in <front>.

All the best,
Hugh

Sent from my phone.

> On Oct 29, 2018, at 08:07, Thomas Stäcker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Roberto, Patrick,
> many thanks for your feedback. The argument of Patrick is exactly what I had in mind. I actually tend to abolish the <body><div type="introduction"> or <front> solution within <text> and move all the metadata to the header (in the case of a born digital edition), even if there is lot of plain text that extends what usually is understood by the term metadata. My feeling is, however, that there should be a sort of recommendation in the Guidlines addressing this issue, if there is broad consenus about it. At least I am convinced that editorial metadata (what is annother expression for critical introduction) would be much better in future when we encourage editors to use the elaborated vocabulary available for the teiHeader instead of putting pertinent data to <text>.
> Best,
> Thomas
>
>
>> Am 29.10.2018 um 10:31 schrieb Roberto Rosselli Del Turco:
>> Hello Patrick,
>> you don't have to convince *me*, since I fully agree with you (I would still consider <front> instead of the <teiHeader> as a legitimate place where to save your introduction to the edited text) on the encoding strategy.
>>
>> This sort of decision typically arises with projects which have had a Web site to present the work being done for all the project's length, and feel it would be a good place to offer an introduction and/or other appropriate paratext. This is also the case of a web site offering distinct functionality when compared to the edition (the CPD site has a collaborative feature, a list of signa tabellionis for each notary, a timeline of events) which reinforces the idea of it actually being the "hub" of the digital edition, with the latter reachable as a separate location.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> R
>>
>> Il 29/10/18 10:19, Patrick Sahle ha scritto:
>>>> Am 29.10.2018 um 08:49 schrieb Roberto Rosselli Del Turco:
>>>> Dear Thomas,
>>>> the first thing to decide is *where* you are going to publish the introduction for your digital edition,
>>> I find this argument quite surprising as I feel that more and more people see "the data" as "the edition" which is conceptually independent from arbitrary acts of publication (see my theory on transmedialization; and yes, I know about the limitations of such a claim).
>>> With this feeling I totally understand Thomas' question which sheds some light on deeper ontological questions on electronic texts. For a spontaneous reaction I would say that everything depends on your own understanding of text, text representation and critical editing.
>>> If you emphasize that a critical introduction is describing a text that is containes in <text>, the header seems the obvious place to put that description
>>> If you emphasize that the digital representation together with the critical introduction to it are an intellectual work in it's own right and autonomy, the body may contain both
>>> But of course we are talking of two different texts here: a represented text that is talked about and the edition as another expression of a text
>>>
>>> All known, I know. But I wonder whether there is broad consensus on this or still room for discussion?
>>> Best wishes anyway, Patrick
>>>
>>>> because some projects prefer to have a dedicated web site which is actually separate from the actual published edition; in the which case, you can have a minimal TEI header since everything is published elsewhere. See for instance the Codice Pelavicino Digitale:
>>>>
>>>> http://pelavicino.labcd.unipi.it/
>>>>
>>>> Note that in the digital edition proper you have *part* of a critical introduction, since the content of the <msDesc> element is available via the MS Desc button:
>>>>
>>>> http://pelavicino.labcd.unipi.it/evt/
>>>>
>>>> (very slow web server at the moment, please be patient).
>>>>
>>>> We're considering supporting a full introduction to a digital edition in EVT directly inside the latter, however, by expanding the "Project Info" window. What would you think of that? Many scholars prefer a separate web site, but I'm starting to lean towards the "everything in the digital edition" solution.
>>>>
>>>> Last note, if not in the header I would put such an introduction in the <front> element.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> R
>>>>
>>>> Il 29/10/18 08:32, Thomas Stäcker ha scritto:
>>>>> Dear list,
>>>>> even though I have been working with the TEI for a couple of years I am still uncertain about the function and role of the teiHeader versus a critical introduction that as a rule precedes every serious critical edition. I checked the archive of the list, but couldn‘t find any discussion or recommendation about that matter, but might have overlooked it. Currently we include the critical introduction in the body of the edition (<body><div type=„introduction“>). This solution is taken from examples of analog editions that are encoded according to the TEI and where it is evident that all parts of the text including the editorial introduction have to be represented in the digital version of it either. However, when we turn to a born digital edition things are less clear as we can populate the teiHeader with that kind of meta-information. In addition, the teiHeader offers markup that is especially designed and dedicated to describe that particular kind of information whereas the critical introduction in the body would be less normative. Accordingly, the critical introduction can be regarded as in a way redundant to the Header or even superfluous. My question is if there exists any recommondation about how a critical introduction shall be treated in born digital editions. I feel a teiHeader should be there anyway, but how is it to be distinguished from the critical introduction or how can this relation of the teiHeader to the critical introduction be defined? I'd be most grateful for any hint or recommendation.
>>>>> Best
>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Apl. Prof. Dr. Patrick Sahle
>>> Universität zu Köln <http://www.uni-koeln.de> - Cologne Center for eHumanities (CCeH) <http://www.cceh.uni-koeln.de/>
>>> Koordinierungsstelle Digital Humanities der Nordrhein-Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften <http://cceh.uni-koeln.de/DH-AWK/>
>>> Data Center for the Humanities <http://www.dch.uni-koeln.de/>
>>> Institut für Dokumentologie und Editorik <http://www.i-d-e.de>
>>> @patrick_sahle <https://twitter.com/patrick_sahle> - @CCeHum <https://twitter.com/CCeHum> - @ideinfo <https://twitter.com/ideinfo> - @dhd2018 <https://twitter.com/dhd2018>
>>
>>
>
> --
> ***************************************
> Prof. Dr. Thomas Stäcker
> Direktor der
> Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Darmstadt
> Magdalenenstr. 8
> 64289 Darmstadt
> +49 (0)6151 16-76200
> [log in to unmask]

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

November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
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