Print

Print


For what it is worth, in the simplest case, we would break the list into
multiple lists, with no further
ado:

<p>There are three ways to do this.</p>
<list>
<item>1. The good way.</item>
<item>2. The better way.</item>
</list.
<p>You know, this reminds me of a joke.
No, what was I saying? Oh yes, three
ways:</p>
<list>
<item>3. The best way.</item>
</list>

or more likely:

<p>There are three ways to do this.
<list>
<item>1. The good way.</item>
<item>2. The better way.</item>
</list.
You know, this reminds me of a joke.
No, what was I saying? Oh yes, three
ways:
<list>
<item>3. The best way.</item>
</list>
</p>

This kind of situation is not unique to lists.
All sorts of features, and therefore all sorts
of elements, can be interrupted by commentary,
or excurses, or almost anything. But lists
are perhaps especially close to ordinary prose,
being essentially a slightly regularized form
of prose, and therefore something into and out
of which it is particularly easy to slip.
Speeches fall into that category too, especially
in trial narratives and similarly semi-dramatic
genres which frequently dip into and jump back
out of dramatic form without warning. A single
speech might in that case be similarly broken
into several separate <sp> elements.

In our period (1475-1700), when it seems that 
half the books consist of commentaries on or 
rebuttals of other books, said books being often
quoted in extenso ; and the other half are sermons
or theological tracts thoroughly and inconsistently
organized by list-like numbered points going down ten or twenty
levels, only to be forgotten and interrupted by additional
hierarchical schemes -- markup requires a
creative mix of interrupted tags, alternating
tabs (<ab type="text"> vs. <ab type="commentary"),
impure use of tables, slightly abusive use of
<q>, and extensive use of <floatingText>.

    <p>Schaffner poses a ridiculously simplistic
    model of available choices. He divides them into
    
    <q>
    <list>
    <head>The Three Ways</head>
    <item>The good way.</item>
    <item>The better way.</item>
    </list>
    </q>
    
    These already present an impoverished view of 
    the world. He should at least include the
    "bad way' and the "worse way', if only
    for symmetry's sake. Instead he concludes
    with a half baked
    
    <q>
    <list>
    <item>3. The best way.</item>
    </list>
    </q>
    
    which is of use to no one.</p>

When the interrupted (or quoted) text itself contains internal structure
(divs or div-liminal tags
especially), <floatingText> is usually called for:


    <p>Schaffner resorts to the tired trope of the
    public epistle, beginning his diatribe with a
    lot of worn-out old fictional furniture,
    
      <floatingText type="letter">
      <body>
      <div type="extract">
      <head>A PUBLIC LETTER</head>
      <opener>
      <signed>Paul, voice of the people</signed>
      <salute>To the citizens of TEIland, greetings.</salute>
      </opener>
      <p>Things are awry in TEI. It is time to get allow
      div,p as well as p,div.</p>
      </div>
      </body>
      </floatingText>
      
    But he soon forgets these trappings and addresses
    The Council, his real enemy, directly,
    
      <floatingText type="letter">
      <body>
      <div type="extract">
      <p>I trust you now see the error of your ways.</p>
      <closer>
      <dateline>From my well-worn chair</dateline>
      <signed>Your well-wisher, pfs</signed>
      </closer>
      <trailer>Letter To the Council</trailer>
      </div>
      </body>
      </floatingText>
      
     And so his folly is exposed.</p>
     
pfs 



On Wed, Aug 12, 2015, at 11:08, James Cummings wrote:
> On 12/08/15 15:28, Frederik Elwert wrote:
> > I think the issue was something like this:
> >
> >    <p>There are three kinds of things:</p>
> >    <list>
> >      <item>There is thing #1.</item>
> >      <item>There is thing #2.</item>
> >      <p>Some argue that #1 and #2 are actually the same thing.</p>
> >      <item>Then there is thing3.</item>
> >    </list>
> 
> I think semantically this could also be considered is a list with 
> a nested list?
> 
> <p>There are three kinds of things:</p>
>    <list>
>      <item>
> 	<list>
> 	 <item>There is thing #1.</item>
> 	 <item>There is thing #2.</item>
> 	</list>
>   	<p>Some argue that #1 and #2 are actually the same thing.</p>
>      </item>
>      <item>Then there is thing3.</item>
>    </list>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > I think one way to solve this would be to use multiple lists. The
> > problem is then expressing that the two lists are actually one list. I
> > *think* one might go with @next/@prev, but I would be curious to hear
> > oppinions on that:
> 
> I'd only use that if the single list was fragmented by some other 
> hierarchy I was more interested in at the time.
> 
> >
> > I think there are good reasons to assume that such a structure might exist:
> >
> >    <div>
> >      <head>Chapter 1</head>
> >      <p>The grandfather told his grandchildren a story.</p>
> >      <div>
> >        <p>A prince and a princess met.</p>
> >        <p>And they lived happily ever after.</p>
> >      </div>
> >      <p>The grandchildren had already fallen asleep.</p>
> >    </div>
> 
> As MartinM has noted this is a canonical example of a floating 
> text, so use <floatingText> (And don't use <q> or <quote> as he 
> might also unconscionably suggest. ;-) )
> 
> 
> > One can solve this in the way you suggest, but I think it is more of a
> > workaround than a coherent content model. The TEI guidelines do in fact
> > allow <p> and <div> on the same level, but only with <p> *before* <div>,
> > not after. But given this example, why would I have to encapsulate the
> > last <p> into a (superfluous) <div>, while I don’t have to do that for
> > the first <p>?
> 
> <div> has a very complex content model. You may have a text with 
> no divisions at all, thus need to be able to just have <p>'s (or 
> similar) inside it.  Any time we look at simplifying the content 
> model it opens numerous other cans of worms. ;-)
> 
> -James
> 
> -- 
> Dr James Cummings, [log in to unmask]
> Academic IT Services, University of Oxford
-- 
Paul Schaffner  Digital Library Production Service
[log in to unmask] | http://www.umich.edu/~pfs/