Hi all,

in the transcription of Jane Austen's manuscript an element like <ornament> would be perfect as JA tend to reproduce in her manuscripts the appearance of printed books ruling, for instances, headings and drawings rules to fill lines at the end of paragraphs.

In some cases a rend attribute can be used, for instance <head rend="ruled">, but in other cases it is more difficult as for the filling rules for which I use a <seg> element or for decorations she draw in the covers.
This decorations are indeed really basic and it seems really not worthy to include such thing as graphics of images as they can be reproduced in the output using HTML/CSS features.

Perhaps the needs of my project are really too specific, but I just wanted to mention a circumstance in which I would have used such element in case it would have been available.


Lou's Laptop wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">Back in the mists of time, in P1, and even also in P2,  to be exact, the TEI boasted an element called <ornament>.  I quote:


Description:  marks the position of a printers device, ornament or fig-
     ure for example on a title page or elsewhere in a printed text.
Attributes:      desc:  provides a brief description of the appearance of the orna-
     Data type:  CDATA
     Value:  A brief descriptive phrase      Default value:  #IMPLIED
     This attribute is optional. Example:           <ornament desc='a donkey burdened with books'>
                  <s>DEFEROR IN VICVM</s>
                  <s>VENDENTEM THVS ET ODORES</s>
          </ornament> Remarks:  Any text included in the ornament may be encoded as distinct
     segments as content of the <ornament> element. The appearance of
     the ornament itself (for example as a bit-mapped image) should be
     encoded in the same way as other embedded images; see section 42,
     "Formal Grammar for the TEI-Interchange-Format Subset of SGML,"
     [in separate fascicle]
Part:  base tag set for common core features.
Member of classes:  tpParts

In P3 this element was removed, largely on the grounds that <figure> would do the job just as well, though maybe the vagueness and inaccuracy of the tagdoc quoted above didn't encourage anyone to keep it.

However, bibliographers are a tenacious bunch, and the revival of this element has now been proposed in some quarters (you know who you are).... so what do the People think?

Are printers ornament sufficiently interesting -- and crucially, sufficiently different -- that they deserve an element of their own? Or should P5 continue to insist that you represent them in your encoding by means of a <graphic> or <figure> element?

Elena Pierazzo
Associate Researcher
Centre for Computing in the Humanities
King's College London
Kay House 
7 Arundel St
London WC2R 3DX

Phone: 0207-848-1949
Fax: 0207-848-2980