clarify definition of @from on locus and biblScope

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

We need to clarify for both locus and biblScope whether @from can be used independently of @to (as with, e.g. <span>), and if so what it means (from here to end, or this point only?)

Original comment by: @gabrielbodard

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Assigning to martindholmes and setting as AMBER as will need further discussion.

Original comment by: @jamescummings

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

• milestone: --> AMBER
• assigned_to: nobody --> martindholmes

Original comment by: @jamescummings

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Noting that before working on this, I need to check what Lou has done on ticket <http://purl.org/tei/FR/3518932>, which I think may overlap.

Original comment by: @martindholmes

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Breakout group thinks that for encoding "p. 3", we are happy with either:

<biblScope from="3" to="3">3</biblScope>

<biblScope n="3">3</biblScope>

and want Council to say which they prefer.

For encoding "p. 3ff", you should do

<biblScope from="3">3</front>

Original comment by: @kshawkin

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Sorry for putting my 2p here but you don't seriously think @n is an option. If you want to keep some kind of coherence ("interop"?) with analogous construct (cf. your second example), you should just rely on @from-@to. Or have I missed something.... ?

Original comment by: @laurentromary

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

• assigned_to: Martin Holmes --> ellimylonas
• Group: AMBER --> GREEN

Original comment by: @jamescummings

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Council face-to-face 2013-04 agrees with this; EM to clarify by using a 'remarks' in the elementSpecs of locus, biblScope, and citedRange.

Original comment by: @jamescummings

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

(For Laurent's benefit, we decided not use @n.)

Original comment by: @kshawkin

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Oxford 2013-11 face-to-face: EM to do before next teleconference.

Original comment by: @jamescummings

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Added <remark>s to explain usage when
a) only one page or unit is cited. = use @from, @to with identical value
b) only start page is cited. = use @from alone.

to the following elements: <locus>, <biblScope>, <citedRange>

Original comment by: @emylonas

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

• status: open --> closed-fixed
• Priority: 5 --> 1(low)

Original comment by: @emylonas

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Closed, as per comment above

Original comment by: @emylonas

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

This issue was originally assigned to SF user: ellimylonas
Current user is: emylonas

[kshawkin]

The <remarks> that Elli added to the specs for <biblScope>, <citedRange>, and <locus> should be revisited. First of all, there is a sentence fragment beginning with "For example,". More importantly, a notation like "3ff." is only used (as far as I can think of) for a range of cited content and thus should be attached only to the specs for <citedRange> and <locus> but not <biblScope>.

[ebeshero]

This is related to recent discussion on the TEI list re #1555 as the need to clarify the distinction between <biblScope> and <citedRange> emerged in the same context. I'm happy to take these since I was on the list conversation and obviously needed the clarification myself!

[lb42]

Why shouldn't a notation like "3ff" be used for a biblScope? It seems entirely plausible to me. I might have a book of essays, each of which is a distinct item, each of which I want to specify using biblScope, and I might just know the page number in the collection on which each one begins. That's not citedRange.

[kshawkin]

I've just never seen a citation to a whole work (calling for <biblScope>) where the author names only the page number that the work starts on, whereas I have seen citations of a discussion of some concept in a larger work (which calls for <citedRange>) in which only the starting page number is given. I suggest waiting till we find an attestation of use.

[lb42]

Well, it depends on your definition of "whole work" of course, but let's say I want to refer to one particular issue of Addison's "Spectator" (no 327 for March 15), as reprinted in Tonson's 1733 edition, volume 5. In that edition (I just checked), no 327 begins on page 25. Surely I'd refer to that issue using a biblScope such as <biblScope unit="page" from="25"/>. I agree that I'd use citedRange if I was discussing some concept or other, but suppose I just want to cite the issue?

[kshawkin]

I was using "whole work" here to refer anything that is cited in its entirety, which would include a particular issue of Addison's "Spectator". I agree with the way you characterize the choice of <biblScope> and <citedRange>.

To reiterate my view, in the case where you want to cite the whole issue, I can only recall seeing citations that include the ending page number (in addition to the starting page number). But maybe I just haven't read enough bibliographic citations or just haven't noticed cases where only the starting page number is given.

[lb42]

You agree that it's plausible, anyway!

[emylonas]

I have looked around and asked some colleagues in the library. Most agree that when citing a complete work (for ex. an article) in a bibliographic entry, which belongs in <biblScope> best practice is to have both page numbers for the beginning and end of the work. (@from and @to) but that one does encounter citations that only have a start page. This may be a more modern habit, and is also possible in some scientific citation formats. So, I think it should be allowed in <biblScope>. stet.

[emylonas]

Closing with fd0e073