-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Dr. Karsten Uhde [mailto:uhde@staff.uni-marburg.de] Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. November 2004 07:51 An: 'g.vogeler@lmu.de'; '102063.2152@compuserve.com'; 'andreas.kuczera@web.de' Betreff: AW: <regestum> Dear all, In my opinion we have three types of "Regest" in Germany (like probably in other countries) and besides them one more common use of this word: 1. The "Vollregest", is something like we can find in the RI. It gives all information, all names and places that are given in the text of the charter. 2. The "Kurzregest", one can find as part of most archival finding aids for fonds with charters. It contains only the important facts and names. 3. The "Kopfregest" is something like a headline before giving the full text of a charter and it contains only the name of the issuer, the name of the addressee and the main information of the dispositio, nothing else. We in Marburg use the word "Regest" in all three cases only for the text, not for additional parts like a diplomatic analysis or the information within our <witlist> element. Additional to these three kinds of "Regest", this word is used by a lot of people for the whole entry about one charter in a book. In this case, "Regest" contains not only the "Vollregest" but also the Number, place and date of the charter, the diplomatic analysis, bibliographic information, the witlist elements etc. So, all German-speaking people will have the problem not to know, what <regestum> and also <regesta> will mean, without having a look on the hierarchy of the elements or the tag-library definitions. If this is also a problem in other languages, especially in English, we should think about changing it. Perhaps <charter> (Urkunde) or <charterentry> (Urkundeneintrag) could be better than <regestum> and <regestum> could then be used instead of <abstract> Greetings from Marburg Karsten -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Georg Vogeler [mailto:G.Vogeler@lrz.uni-muenchen.de] Gesendet: Freitag, 12. November 2004 16:18 An: cei-l@lists.lrz-muenchen.de; 102063.2152@compuserve.com; andreas.kuczera@web.de; uhde@staff.uni-marburg.de Betreff: <regestum> Hello from Munich,
6.) I'm somewhat unhappy with <regestum>. As far as I have understood this would contain ALL the information on a given charter except the text? Then we would have an extremely wide notion of "regestum" since this would include all bibliographic reference, description of physical phenomena, discussion of authenticity, discussion of the content of a charter and so on. Is this really the common use of the word "regestum"? I have some doubts. Maybe we can find a more generic word? And the restrict <regestum> to what it really means: the short summary of the main information of a given charter. And for this, the word has a perfectly clear and specific notion and should be an element rather than an attribute of another already established element.
We have two elements in our list which could easily be confused in German as both are called "Regest": One is the "Kopfregest" heading an scholarly edition and the other is the "Vollregest" like that they are collecting for the Regesta imperii, giving the content of the document, extensive description and some historical and diplomatic analysis. If we see the "Kopfregest" together with the following parts (textual tradition, bibliographic informationes, diplomatic analysis) and compare that kind of text with the "Vollregest" of the Regesta imperii then I find them very similar. Thus we could do it with the term "<regestum>" for the "Vollregest" (including information on textual tradition etc.) and "<abstract>" for the "Kopfregest" (or "summary" or "analyse" in french). And finally I think the archival description is similar to the "Vollregest" and also called "Regest". But Karsten Uhde can correct me. Thus I would stick to <regestum> <abstract> ...</abstract> <witList> ... </witlist> ... </regestum> <tenor> ... </tenor> Best wishes Georg _________________________________________________________ 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)