Print

Print


I fully agree, James, of course.


Your stellar reputation as a lover of xml:ids definitely precedes you. You’ve been mentioned several times in this context at the xQuery Institute at Vanderbilt… :) 


All best,
Toma


--
Toma TasovacBelgrade Center for Digital Humanities
http://humanistika.org 



> On Jun 12, 2014, at 11:32 AM, James Cummings <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Toma,
> 
> 
> Enabling this kind of work, even if done later by someone else,
> is why I often recommend providing lots of useful ids for texts.
> My preferred granularity is words so I sometimes recommend
> automatically adding @xml:id to <w> elements, or indeed
> automatically add <w> elements around orthographic words, even
> when they are not being used by the current project. This would
> allow others to point into the text and comment (or markup)
> portions of the text through using these ids.
> 
> 
> You are right to point out that checking this kind of thing is a
> good application of schematron. (And for those that don't know
> you can also define those project specific schematron rules right
> in your TEI ODD file.)
> 
> 
> -James
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 12/06/14 15:52, Toma Tasovac wrote:
> 
> 
>> Dear Antonio,
>> 
>> 
>> I've used your first option (two separate files). We started with
>> a modernized spelling version of an 18th-century text (which we
>> had from the publisher) and were then changing the spelling back
>> to the original spelling.
>> 
>> 
>> So we started with two identical files, automatically created
>> xml:ids in each (adding a suffix in the id to differentiate
>> between the old spelling file and new spelling file) and the
>> @corresp pointing to the exact same word in the other file.
>> 
>> 
>> Because old and new spellings sometimes don't follow the same
>> word segmentations, ids would eventually get out of sync (i.e.
>> one word in one file would be pointing to two files in the other
>> or vice versa), but there I wrote Schematron rules to make sure
>> that pointers are correct in both directions (i.e. to make sure
>> that an id from one file is pointing to existing id or ids in the
>> other file). It was up to the encoder to get things right, of
>> course, but Schematron was helpful underlining cases of
>> mismatched ids and corresp ids in two files.
>> 
>> 
>> All best,
>> Toma
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Toma Tasovac
>> Belgrade Center for Digital Humanities
>> http://humanistika.org
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jun 12, 2014, at 7:41 AM, ANTONIO ROJAS CASTRO
>>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi Martin,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Both old and modernized spelling "versions" (or transcriptions)
>>> are based on one manuscript - which I call "base manuscript"
>>> because I used it to collate other manuscripts in order to get
>>> substantive variants.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Many thanks
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2014-06-12 14:34 GMT+02:00 Martin Holmes <[log in to unmask]
>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi Antonio,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Is your base text one of the two versions you mention, or
>>> is it a third text?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Martin
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 14-06-12 04:07 AM, ANTONIO ROJAS CASTRO wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Dear TEI list members
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I am currently encoding a long poem in Spanish and I
>>> have come across
>>> some difficulties. I have been encoding both an old
>>> spelling version and
>>> a modern spelling version of my base manuscript in
>>> order to present them
>>> as parallel texts. In addition, after collating several
>>> scripts, my aim
>>> is to encode a critical apparatus attached to the
>>> modern spelling version.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I have been reviewing the Guidelines but I failed to
>>> find what should be
>>> the "best" method:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 1. I could treat these transcriptions as different
>>> texts and encode
>>> 
>>> 
>>> them in different XML files - although I'm using
>>> the same script as
>>> a base text?
>>> 2. I could use the <choice> element and combine the
>>> <orig> and <reg>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> elements to encode both transcriptions?
>>> 3. I could link both transcriptions as parallel texts
>>> using the
>>> 
>>> 
>>> <linkGrp> element as described here?
>>> http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/SA.html#SACSAL
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I have seen that some projects follow the first
>>> methodology but I don't
>>> know how they connect both files so I remain suspicious
>>> (browser?); I
>>> would prefer not to follow the second one because I'm
>>> already using the
>>> element <choice> to encode abbreviations and expansions
>>> and I believe
>>> there would be a conflict with the apparatus. Finally
>>> the last method I
>>> think is meant to be used for encoding one text in
>>> different languages
>>> (original and translation) and also it entails I'll
>>> have to identify
>>> each <l> in order to link them, which I began to do and
>>> it is very tiring.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> This would be a native digital edition so I don't have
>>> to stick to any
>>> model apart from my base manuscript.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Any advice? Any other method?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Many thanks.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> All the best
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Antonio Rojas Castro
>>> http://upf.academia.edu/AntonioRojasCastro
>>> https://twitter.com/Rojas_Castro_A
>>> https://www.zotero.org/groups/humanidades_digitales
>>> 650 767 335
>>> <http://www.facebook.com/antoni.rojas>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Antonio Rojas Castro
>>> http://upf.academia.edu/AntonioRojasCastro
>>> https://twitter.com/Rojas_Castro_A
>>> https://www.zotero.org/groups/humanidades_digitales
>>> 650 767 335
>>> <http://www.facebook.com/antoni.rojas>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Dr James Cummings, [log in to unmask]
> Academic IT Services, University of Oxford
> 
> 
>