If the missing type-attribute is the only problem then I will put that suggestion in the proposal for the TEI (listBibl could be understood as a part of the divn-class, couldn't it?) Best wishes Georg On 9 Nov 2004 at 20:18, Gautier Poupeau wrote:
You are totally right. I admit not to think this problem like that while it's very pertinent. Effectivelly, this kind of information is togethered in a part (Drucke in german and Indiqué in French). For that, actually, I together this all informations in a <witness sigil="indiqué"> and you are right it's not good. Effectively, it's bibliographical informations, so your proposal is good for me.
The only problem is there isn't the "type" attribute in <listBibl> element. But, it's not a big problem, we can use "n" attribute or propose to TEI consortium to add this attribute. Or, maybe better, we can propose to TEI consortium to add an element for determinate the type of document we describe in the bibliographical entry or use the <biblScope> element with a "type" attribute. In this case, the <listBibl> element correspond to the "Drucke" (or Indiqué) part, and each entry is described with the <bibl>, <biblFull> or <biblStruct> element. For example : <listBibl n="Indique"> (the content of this attribute must be normalyzed) <biblStruct>Sybel, Sickel: Kaiserurkunden in Abbildungen, <biblScope>Taf. 15</biblScope> <biblScope type="support">Regestum</biblScope> </biblStruct> <bibStructl>Böhmer - Ficker - Winkelmann <biblScope> 1453</biblScope> <biblScope type="support">Facsimilia</biblScope> </biblStruct> </listBibl>
Gautier
Georg Vogeler a écrit :
Hello everybody,
another question Gautier arised: Why specific elements for <facsimilia>, <regesta> etc.? Having the way in mind the MGH prints their editions I asked myself if those bibliographic informations do have any more abstract function.
If I remember the concept of Th. Sickel right, at first they shall ease the access to other scholar ressource dealing with the charter. But they are indeed part of the textual tradition given in the <witList>.
As they are usually grouped together in printed editions with some starting heading ("Drucke: ...") I tend to keep them in the hierarchy as an element. That's not correct from point of view of a new edition as Gautier is doing at the Ecole des Chartes. But it describes a concept scholarly editing has been done.
A slightly different problem are the <studies> dealing with the charter. They are a kind of bibliography given by the editor as a part of his diplomatic analysis.
But I wouldn't mind to leave all those parts of the metadata as elements encapsulating a collection of <bibl>-elements. Maybe we could defuse the problem by adding a terminology for a type-attribute describing the function of the single bibliographic information. We would then end with the proposal Patrick Sahle made earlier and use the TEI-element: <listBibl>
<listBibl type="facsimilia"> <biblStruct>Sybel, Sickel: Kaiserurkunden in Abbildungen, <biblScope>Taf. 15</biblScope> </biblStruct> </listBibl> <listBibl type="regesta"> <bibStructl>Böhmer - Ficker - Winkelmann <biblScope> 1453</biblScope></biblStruct> </listBibl>
I could live with that perfectly.
Georg
On 5 Nov 2004 at 22:05, Gautier Poupeau wrote:
I'm ok with Michael. I already say in Münnich, for me it's an error to create specific elements for the different part of a charter. So, <seg> can be a solution, but there is better : <div> and we add the type of part with the attribute "type". It's the goal of the <div> element to indicate the structure of the document. It's important, because we can edite another type of documents : letters, livre de comptes who don't have the same structure... and if we don't use generical elements to indicate the structure of our charters, we will not have to interrogate the different type of sources together and we loose the principle of interoperability, the goal of XML. For the same reason (think generic, not too specific), i think the <document> element can be replaced by a <div type="document"> or <div type="charters"> and for the <num> element we can use an attribute for example "n". Indeed, i think the meta-information like the number of a charter must be in an attribute and the text beetween the element must be interresting for an interrogation for a research. In the same logic, we can say <div type="text"> for <tenor>. For example : <div type="document"> <div type="regestum"> regeste </div> <div type="text"> <div type="protocol"> <div type="invocatio"> blabla.... </div>..... </div> <div type="context"> ..... </div> <div type="eschatocol"> .... </div> </div> </div>
The <elongata> element can be replaced by <hi rend="ellongata">, indeed the <hi> element "marks a word or phrase as graphically distinct from the surrounding text" (tei Guideliness). This remark don't prevent to normalyze between us the content of the "type" attribute. I don't understand good the goal of the element : facsimilia, prints, regesta, studies. Are you sure it's an element or the content of an element ? If i understant good, the goal of this elements is to indicate wich type of edition we encode. For that, we can use the <witDetail> element with the "type" attribute, for example : <witDetail type="classdocuments">facsimilia</witDetail>.
Gautier Poupeau
Michael Margolin a écrit :
Hi,
1. We suggest to use TEI element <seg> inside of the element <tenor> as a generic element for any diplomatic part encoding. The use <seg> would allow to avoid any restrictions on the hierarchy or naming for any given class of charters. The name of the diplomatic part shall be assigned to the "type" attribute.
2. We suggest to use CID definitions of diplomatic parts for general guidance only and to allow any other name to be used without violating of the <tenor> definition.
Michael Margolin, DEEDS Project, University of Toronto
----- Original Message ----- From: "Georg Vogeler" <G.Vogeler@lrz.uni-muenchen.de> To: <cei-l@lists.lrz-muenchen.de> Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 7:28 AM Subject: TEI proposal - attachment 2
... and the mailing list limits the size of attachments to 40 KB - so here is the link to the rtf-document:
http://www.cei.lmu.de/TEI-Proposal.rtf
and a pdf-Version:
http://www.cei.lmu.de/TEI-Proposal.pdf
_________________________________________________________ Historisches Seminar Abteilung Geschichtliche Hilfswissenschaften Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Muenchen Postadresse: Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, D-80539 Muenchen Bueroadresse: Amalienstr. 52, Zi. 211 T: ++49-89-2180 3784 F: ++49-89-21 80 2084 e-mail: G.Vogeler@lmu.de http://www.geschichte.uni-muenchen.de/ghw/personen_vogeler.shtml Moderator von der Virtual Library Geschichtliche Hilfswissenchaften (http://www.vl-ghw.lmu.de)
_________________________________________________________ Historisches Seminar Abteilung Geschichtliche Hilfswissenschaften Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Muenchen Postadresse: Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, D-80539 Muenchen Bueroadresse: Amalienstr. 52, Zi. 211 T: ++49-89-2180 3784 F: ++49-89-21 80 2084 e-mail: G.Vogeler@lmu.de http://www.geschichte.uni-muenchen.de/ghw/personen_vogeler.shtml Moderator von der Virtual Library Geschichtliche Hilfswissenchaften (http://www.vl-ghw.lmu.de)
_________________________________________________________ Historisches Seminar Abteilung Geschichtliche Hilfswissenschaften Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Muenchen Postadresse: Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, D-80539 Muenchen Bueroadresse: Amalienstr. 52, Zi. 211 T: ++49-89-2180 3784 F: ++49-89-21 80 2084 e-mail: G.Vogeler@lmu.de http://www.geschichte.uni-muenchen.de/ghw/personen_vogeler.shtml Moderator von der Virtual Library Geschichtliche Hilfswissenchaften (http://www.vl-ghw.lmu.de)