Print

Print


Hi TEI-L,

I think Gerrit's suggestion is an overstatement. If I am 
understanding Ulrike correctly then she probably could be just 
using @type on zone.

I am far from expert in this type of editing, and those more 
familiar with it may wish to comment more, but if people are 
feeling constrained by not having interpretative elements inside 
sourceDoc, then I'd suggest that they are probably mis-using it. 
  If you really need those elements (such as list that Patrick 
suggests later) then I don't think you are doing the type of 
transcription that sourceDoc was invented for.  (Instead I would 
use a transcription inside the text element and @facs to point to 
zones inside facsimile.)  I remember the arguments and long 
discussions when discussing the content models of sourceDoc and 
zone and my memory of this is that the limited content model is 
entirely intentional and that the thought was any attempts to 
open it up should be resisted.

(Of course your Council will re-consider the issue open-mindedly 
with the submission of any feature request.)

-James

On 04/02/14 16:21, Gerrit Brüning wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Ulrike's and Matt's statements are further evidence that the
> currently very strict content model of <line> can not be
> maintained. The strictness only seems to stimulate a variety of
> workarounds.
>
> Gerrit
>
> Am 04.02.2014 16:19, schrieb Matthew Davis:
>> Dear Ulrike,
>>
>> I ran into something similar in that I needed to use <ex> under
>> <line>.  What I ended up doing is wrapping the actual
>> transcription in an <orig> tag, which then allowed me to use
>> many of the tags that were otherwise unavailable under <line>
>> directly.  Perhaps you can do something similar?
>>
>> All best,
>> --Matt
>>
>> On Feb 4, 2014, at 10:12 AM, Ulrike Henny
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear list,
>>>
>>> if I would like to transcribe a source document inside of
>>> <sourceDoc> because I am interested in its physical
>>> realization, how can I represent text parts or zones that
>>> "look like" headings, paragraphs or lists, for example?
>>>
>>> Would those simply be zones (maybe typed somehow) and list
>>> items with labels marked up as single lines or as segments?
>>>
>>> Why is it not possible to use the corresponding structural
>>> elements inside of <surface> or <zone>?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Ulrike
>
>


-- 
Dr James Cummings, [log in to unmask]
Academic IT Services, University of Oxford