Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

n="added gathering" in XML examples #1816

Closed
gerritbruening opened this issue Sep 11, 2018 · 9 comments
Closed

n="added gathering" in XML examples #1816

gerritbruening opened this issue Sep 11, 2018 · 9 comments
Assignees

Comments

@gerritbruening
Copy link

See https://github.com/search?q=org%3ATEIC+%22added+gathering%22&type=Code.

@jamescummings thinks that this is only a typo for n="added_gathering" (with an underscore to make it one attribute value).
But do you really think that added gathering is a good value for @n?

@jamescummings
Copy link
Member

Definitely a typo. Underscore or camel case addedGathering if keeping that term.

Whether it is a gathering or not one can't really tell from that markup.

@gerritbruening
Copy link
Author

Maybe "quire" would be the more common term. But given that a quire was added here, what I had taken for granted: Again, would you store this information in @n?

@jamescummings
Copy link
Member

jamescummings commented Sep 11, 2018

I think gathering and quire are both used depending on school of description (and print vs mss) so that bothers me less. I mean we have gb as gathering beginning in the tei as well which is at least consistency. But the free text in the n attribute is definitely something I'd consider a bug even if others do not. Must do a check for all @n attributes and check!

@gerritbruening
Copy link
Author

gerritbruening commented Sep 11, 2018

I personally don't like these blanks either, but here I read:

single token which may however contain punctuation characters, whitespace

Anyway, is "added gathering" a "number (or other label)"? Maybe I just don't understand what "label" is for in this context. Please forgive my stubbornness.

@jamescummings
Copy link
Member

jamescummings commented Sep 11, 2018

Yes. I think that is also not good. I would have @n be an unordered series of whitespace-separated tokens (like @rend)

@hcayless
Copy link
Member

I don't see any problem here. @n's datatype is teidata.text, which permits punctuation and whitespace. @rend's datatype is 1-∞ of teidata.word. These are different for perfectly sensible reasons.

@sydb
Copy link
Member

sydb commented Sep 11, 2018

And, for that matter, "added gathering" is a perfectly reasonable value for 1-∞ of teidata.word. (@jamescummings wants teidata.word to be teidata.token, but it was not intended that way.)

@jamescummings
Copy link
Member

jamescummings commented Sep 12, 2018

Sure, I'd feel better if that was the case but accept it is not. I have a distinct memory of council several years ago deciding at some point that while we wouldn't change the datatype we would stop exemplifying using spaces in @n. Perhaps I am mistaken. A quick (a probably inaccurate) ballpark search of use of @n with spaces in it (not including things like our guidelines specGrp's) in the Guidelines prose (not spec files) shows that only 3.5% of uses have spaces. Namely:

CC-LanguageCorpora.xml:<egXML xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/Examples"><textDesc n="Informal domestic conversation">
CO-CoreElements.xml:   <divGen n="Index Nominum" type="INDEX-NAMES"/>
CO-CoreElements.xml:   <divGen n="Index Loci" type="INDEX-PLACES"/>
CO-CoreElements.xml:  <div2 n="Amores 1" type="book"><!-- ... --></div2>
CO-CoreElements.xml:  <div2 n="Amores 2" type="book">
CO-CoreElements.xml:    <div3 n="Amores 2.1" type="poem"><!-- ... --></div3>
CO-CoreElements.xml:    <div3 n="Amores 2.10" type="poem">
CO-CoreElements.xml:      <l n="Amores 2.10.7"> ... </l>
FS-FeatureStructures.xml:<egXML xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/Examples" source="#UND"><fLib n="phonological features">
FS-FeatureStructures.xml:<egXML xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/Examples" source="#UND"><fvLib xml:id="fsl1" n="phonological segment definitions">
FS-FeatureStructures.xml:<egXML xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/Examples" source="#UND"><fvLib n="Major category definitions">
FS-FeatureStructures.xml:<egXML xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/Examples" source="#UND"><fLib n="categorial features">
FS-FeatureStructures.xml:<egXML xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/Examples" source="#UND"><fvLib xml:id="C6" n="Claws 6 tags">
FS-FeatureStructures.xml:  <fvLib xml:id="FSL1" n="phonological segment definitions">
FT-TablesFormulaeGraphics.xml:        <figure n="Ex. 3">
PH-PrimarySources.xml:                     <addSpan n="added gathering" hand="#heol" spanTo="#p025"/>

Generally I'm of the opinion where someone wants a truly textual label then really they should be using <label> or similar. But, as you know, I'm resistant to free text in attributes.

@emylonas
Copy link
Contributor

emylonas commented May 8, 2019

Fixed in ca4994b by adding dash to eliminate space

@emylonas emylonas closed this as completed May 8, 2019
@martinascholger martinascholger added this to the Guidelines 3.6.0 milestone Jun 19, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants