Print

Print


>>>>> "Dominic" == Dominic Dunlop <[log in to unmask]> writes:
 
    Dominic> There's also
    Dominic> <unclear>
 
    Dominic> DESCRIPTION: contains a word, phrase, or passage
    Dominic> which cannot be transcribed with certainty because
    Dominic> it is illegible or inaudible in the source.
 
    Dominic> Arguably, <unclear> is syntactic sugar for a kind of
    Dominic> <gap>, anyway.  But see the Guidelines, section
    Dominic> 18.2.4, and make your own choice.
 
I decided to use the tag:
<gap reason="inaudible" resp="transcriber">
 
Which is closer to the real situation.
 
    Nick> I would use the entity &hellip; from the ISOpub entity
    Nick> set (also referred to as "ISO 8879-1986//ENTITIES
    Nick> Publishing//EN") which represents the character (three
    Nick> dots, one character, known as a 'horizontal ellipsis')
    Nick> you are describing.  This character is commonly used to
    Nick> indicate an omission that exists in text for whatever
    Nick> reason.
 
    Dominic> I can't go along with this.  The transcriber's
    Dominic> conventions apparently define ellipses as a form of
    Dominic> mark-up.  In transducing the texts to a
    Dominic> TEI-conformant mark-up, one should transduce them
    Dominic> into the prescribed TEI form -- <gap> or <unclear>
    Dominic> or whatever.
 
Indeed, this is not what I wanted to indicate. It is not the dots
itself that I want to give markup, it's what the dots stand
for. I'll stick to <gap>.
 
Thanks for responding!
 
-- Bruno
 
*------------------------------------------------------------------------*
|Bruno Tersago                                      Tel:  +32-16-32 50 88|
|Centre for Computational Linguistics               Fax:  +32-16-32 50 98|
|Maria-Theresiastraat 21         E-mail: [log in to unmask]
|B-3000 Leuven (Belgium)       URL: http://www.ccl.kuleuven.ac.be/~bruno/|
*------------------------------------------------------------------------*