You are right that my 'A' example could only be done inside something else like a paragraph (yes, I know what you are thinking and sympathise, but there are indeed lines of verse and line groups that occur inside paragraphs). In my test file before emailing I had indeed stuck it inside a paragraph without noticing, mea culpa.
Using method 'B' you say will end up with empty verse lines. Whereas 'C' (if it were allowed) I understand would enable you to do what you want, mark both the verse lines as deleted and their textual content. I'm not against 'C' as a solution here. A verse line (or line group) that has been deleted does not (in my view) cease to be a verse line. Is a verse line where all the content has been deleted (method B) still a verse line? I think any resistance to this comes from the worry of mixing/moving phrase-level elements like <del> to enclose chunk level ones. Any change to the Guidelines will have to be very careful that we're not just throwing out the useful distinction between these levels.
There is, of course, the existing <delSpan> solution where you could point to an <anchor/> just after the deleted/added section. This also has the benefit of being able to span non-well-formed chunks rather than a wrapping element which would be limited in this way. So to re-use the simple example I used before one could do:
But I recognise that is quite heavy-handed for what seems to be a very simple thing.
Dr James Cummings, [log in to unmask]
School of English Literature, Language, and Linguistics, Newcastle University
Le 30 juil. 2018 à 12:29, James Cummings <[log in to unmask]> a écrit :
Am I right that what you are arguing is that since you can have an <l> element inside a <del> that you should be able to have a <del> child of <lg> to wrap the deleted lines that appear as part of a line group?
That is since you can do A already:
A) <add><l>added verse line</l><lg><l>added single line stanza</l></lg></add><del><l>deleted verse line</l><lg><l>deleted single line stanza</l></lg></del>
Or can do B:
B) <l><add>added verse line</add></l><lg><l><add>added single line stanza</add></l></lg><l><del>deleted verse line</del></l><lg><l><del>deleted single line stanza</del></l></lg>
That you should be able to do C?C)<add><l>added verse line</l></add>
<lg><add><l>added single line stanza</l></add></lg><del><l>deleted verse line</l></del><lg><del><l>deleted single line stanza</l></del></lg>
While I tend towards the B style of encoding myself, I can see how if your <lg> had many lines but only some were deleted it might be easier to encode it in the way you suggest.
i.e.<lg><l n="1">Line one</l><l n="2">Line two</l><del><l>deleted line</l></del><l n="3">Line three</l><del><l>deleted line</l></del><l n="4">Line four</l></lg>
Have I understood the problem correctly?
--Dr James Cummings, [log in to unmask]School of English Literature, Language, and Linguistics, Newcastle University
From: TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) public discussion list <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Pierazzo, Elena <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 25 July 2018 09:20:16
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Add/del/subst and block elementsThanks Gerrit. Does anybody object for me to report it as bug in Github then?
> Le 24 juil. 2018 à 10:43, Gerrit Brüning <[log in to unmask]> a écrit :
> Dear Elena,
> Dear all,
> I would like to second this consideration.
> Since 2.9.1 it is allowed to use chunks and other structural elements inside lem and rdg:
> del and add are, in a way, analogous to lem and rdg, so it would seem consistent to keep the content models of these elements parallel.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) public discussion list [mailto:TEI-
>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Pierazzo, Elena
>> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2018 9:37 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Add/del/subst and block elements
>> Dear list,
>> is there a good reason to allo <add> an <del> to contain <l> and <lg> but not to
>> be contained by it? I have the case of a poem where 2 verses (<l>) are
>> substituted by 2 others, these verses are contained by an <lg>.
>> I can encode the following:
>> <add> <l>…</><l>…</l></del>
>> But this is not correct, because <add> and <del> cannot occur within <lg> nor
>> can <subst> which makes the possibility of including <l> within add/dell useless
>> since where else would <l> be? and same apply to <div> and <body>.
>> Elena Pierazzo
>> Professeure d’italien et humanités numériques
>> Université Grenoble-Alpes - LUHCIE
>> Bureau Bâtiment 'Stendhal’ F307
>> BP 25 38040 Grenoble Cedex 9
>> Tel. +33 4 76828032
>> Visiting Senior Research Fellow
>> King's College London
>> Department of Digital Humanities
>> King's College London
>> 26-29 Drury Lane
>> WC2B 5RL