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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Allow @place in <div> #2551

Open
cthomasdta opened this issue Apr 19, 2024 · 6 comments
Open

Allow @place in <div> #2551

cthomasdta opened this issue Apr 19, 2024 · 6 comments
Assignees
@sabineseifert
Labels
Status: Go Type: FeatureRequest
Milestone
Guidelines 4.9.0

Comments

@cthomasdta
Copy link

cthomasdta commented Apr 19, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Originally posted by @cthomasdta in #2542 (comment) [Code-example below slightly modified to clarify my point]

[@lb42 asked:]

[…] Why not use seg ?

In my view, a question of priorities, what we want to express: <seg> is very generic, whereas the most important info imo is that this is a <div>, more specifically a <div type="writingSession" n="3">, exactly like the two other <div type="writingSession"> that the letter consists of.

So we have a clear succession of the same elements for the respective text containers (and not div-div-seg -- as if the last one was something else than the two blocks before that):

<div type="letter">
   <div type="writingSession" n="1"><p>[…]</p></div>
   <div type="writingSession" n="2"><p>[…]</p></div>
   <div type="writingSession" n="3" place="top" rend="upsideDown"><p>[…]</p></div>
</div>

The (again, imo) a little less important info, but still worth noting preferably as an attribute of this div, is that the third writing session was squeezed in on the top of the page (and written upside-down). Since there is something exactly fitting this annotation demand, namely @place (and maybe @rend), I would like to be able to use it there. [Btw I would argue the same for <head>, but that again would be another issue :)]

[…]
@sydb
Copy link
Member

sydb commented Apr 27, 2024

I have to admit, “writing session” does not seem like a viable categorization of logical textual divisions to me. (I concede I may be convinced otherwise.) It seems to me that writing sessions and logical textual divisions are orthogonal to one another. I may very well have written chapters 1, 2, and the first 3½ sentences of chapter 3 in one writing session, and the last 97½ sentences of chapter 3 in the next, no? Thus my instinct is that writing sessions are better left to revision campaigns or <sourceDoc> encoding.

@sydb sydb added this to the Guidelines 4.8.0 milestone Apr 27, 2024
@cthomasdta
Copy link
Author

cthomasdta commented Apr 27, 2024 •
edited
Loading

I have to admit, “writing session” does not seem like a viable categorization of logical textual divisions to me. (I concede I may be convinced otherwise.)

Hi Syd, I'll have to think about that a little longer to maybe convince you – or to concede that you are right.

But for the time being, can we agree that this concern does not relate to the initial request, i.e. allow @place in <div>? This still seems reasonable to me and I would like to focus on this first. Thanks again!

@sabineseifert
Copy link
Contributor

sabineseifert commented May 17, 2024 •
edited
Loading

European subgroup at VF2F April 27:

  • <div type="writingSession"> not considered a good example (treating CMCs as a series of writing episodes rather than transmitted posts)
  • use case where allowing @place in <div> would make sense?
  • difference between @rend and @place: different data types
  • Make @place a subset of @rend?
  • @rend is permitted everywhere and so a subset of @place should be allowed, i.e. adding att.placement to att.global.rendition
  • att.global.rendition shouldn’t be global, since it shouldn’t be allowed within elements of <teiHeader>

Suggestion:

  • Move @place to att.global.rendition
  • Consider if we should move @rendition from global to just being in elements that describe the source (basically leave out <teiHeader>)

@sabineseifert sabineseifert self-assigned this Jun 4, 2024
@sabineseifert
Copy link
Contributor

Discussed in council meeting 2024-09-03: We will implement it, along with #2550

@sabineseifert sabineseifert mentioned this issue Sep 9, 2024
Closed
@tuurma tuurma mentioned this issue Oct 6, 2024
Open
@StefanDumont
Copy link
Contributor

I have to admit, “writing session” does not seem like a viable categorization of logical textual divisions to me. (I concede I may be convinced otherwise.) It seems to me that writing sessions and logical textual divisions are orthogonal to one another. I may very well have written chapters 1, 2, and the first 3½ sentences of chapter 3 in one writing session, and the last 97½ sentences of chapter 3 in the next, no? Thus my instinct is that writing sessions are better left to revision campaigns or <sourceDoc> encoding.

Hmm ... I don't know if it's a bit off-topic here in this issue, but I would like to add, that in letters, "writingSessions" are indeed a logical textual division. Normally also intended by the author if he continues writing on another day and mentions this himself in the new paragraph or even puts an additional, separate dateline above the new section. You're not wrong about other types of text, @sydb, but for letters in particular (and this is what @cthomasdta example was referring to), I would definitely see “writingSession” as a logical text categorization. :-)

@sabineseifert sabineseifert linked a pull request Dec 23, 2024 that will close this issue
Create new att.source and include att.written and att.placement in it #2643
Draft
@sabineseifert sabineseifert removed a link to a pull request Dec 30, 2024
Create new att.source and include att.written and att.placement in it #2643
Draft
@sabineseifert sabineseifert mentioned this issue Dec 30, 2024
Draft
@sabineseifert
Copy link
Contributor

sabineseifert commented Dec 30, 2024 •
edited
Loading

After finishing work on PR #2643, this issue will be addressed by adding att.source to att.global.rendition.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@sabineseifert sabineseifert

Labels
Status: Go Type: FeatureRequest
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Guidelines 4.9.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
5 participants
@sydb @StefanDumont @ebeshero @sabineseifert @cthomasdta