Add @ident to <remarks> and <exemplum>

[martindholmes]

Arising out of work on Stylesheets TEIC/Stylesheets#272, we need a way to identify <remarks> and <exemplum> instances so that we can process them with @mode. @ident is used for this on other elements and attributes, but there is an expectation of some kind of uniqueness there which may not be appropriate for these elements.

[ebeshero]

F2F discussion: We need some kind of identification mechanism: Should it be @ident or @xml:id or something else?

Do we want to have @mode on these, too?

[sydb]

Yes. (We do want <exemplum> and <remarks> to have @mode, too. The question is how should it get it — @ident and @mode are in different classes, and the membership of those classes mostly overlap.)

[ebeshero]

Really, we want to add @mode and @ident.

[scstanley7]

Implement this the same way as <valItem>

[sydb]

(I.e., member of att.combinable and gets @ident directly.)

[raffazizzi]

NB, unlike valItem where @ident is required, I've made it optional in order not to break all existing occurernces of <remarks>

[jamescummings]

Re-opening to question why <exemplum> did not get @ident and the other required attributes to make it identifiable in the same way as <remarks> has been? This would enable to the replacement of just one example from an elementSpec in a project ODD customisation. If it was decided that this should not be done it would be good to have a record of why.

[martindholmes]

I think it got lost in the shuffle; remarks were more important because of potential issues with internationalization, and I think exemplum may just have been forgotten.

[sydb]

I cannot speak to <exemplum>, probably @martindholmes is right. But as to <remarks>, seems to me @ident should be required. After all, you can’t delete it if you can’t refer to it. (And yes, this means that all existing <remarks> (in Source/ and Exemplars/) will need to get an @ident assigned.)

Of course, I do not know that the Stylesheets currently know what to do with <remarks ident="duckR01" mode="delete"/> or some such. If they don’t do the right thing now, it will likely take us months to teach them.

P.S. Feel free to read “change” or “replace” instead of “delete”.

[jamescummings]

@sydb I'm less sure about whether @ident should be required generally. It might be that the TEI-C makes it required in the guidelines files but optional elsewhere. (i.e. through a schema constraint for the ODD for editing the TEI Guidelines) Forcing all projects to have an @ident on their own <remarks> seems overkill to me. (Though of course how many of them use it....)

That is less of a problem than half of this issue (remarks and exemplum) having just been not done. So re-opening for that, but if we want to tidy up ident req/opt then that could be done at the same time.

[sydb]

@jamescummings: I lean towards requiring them all, but agree that in the Guidelines are where it is important, and could certainly live with optional elsewhere.

And yes, getting <exemplum> into att.combinable and getting it its own @ident are the more important bits.

[ebeshero]

Presumably addressing this issue with adding <exemplum> to att.combinable would resolve #1703 , correct?

[martinascholger]

Released with version 4.0.0