WG: <regestum>

[Dr. Karsten Uhde]

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Dr. Karsten Uhde [mailto:uhde at staff.uni-marburg.de] 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. November 2004 07:51
An: 'g.vogeler at lmu.de'; '102063.2152 at compuserve.com';
'andreas.kuczera at 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 at lrz.uni-muenchen.de] 
Gesendet: Freitag, 12. November 2004 16:18
An: cei-l at lists.lrz-muenchen.de; 102063.2152 at compuserve.com;
andreas.kuczera at web.de; uhde at 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 at 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)