hors d'oeuvre unpalatable in 9.4

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

The in-line example of the entry fragment for "hors d'oeuvre" in 9.4. (http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/DI.html#DIHW ) lists the variant pronunciations as: ,aw'duhv O:r dœvr) 'duhv(z)

while the XML example lists, respectively: %aU"dUv OR d0vR "dUv(z)

which seems hardly helpful or clear.

Original comment by: @bansp

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

This issue was originally assigned to SF user: stefanmajewski Current user is: smjwsk

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

• Description has changed:

Diff:

--- old
+++ new
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-The in-line example of the entry fragment for "hors d'oeuvre" in 9.4. (http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/DI.html#DIHW ) lists the variant pronunciations as: 
+The in-line example of the entry fragment for "hors d'oeuvre" in 9.4. (<http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/DI.html#DIHW> ) lists the variant pronunciations as: 
 ,aw'duhv
 O:r dœvr)
 'duhv(z)

Original comment by: @hcayless

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Piotr, can you clarify how you think this should be fixed?

Original comment by: @hcayless

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Clearly, two different phonetic alphabets are used here, possibly as a relic of pre-Unicode times (the one in the XML example looks Sampa-like, i.e., ASCII-friendly). Nowadays, this switch is unwarranted, and in fact might confuse the reader.

I believe that the proper way to proceed is to use the transcription from the inline example throughout.

Original comment by: @bansp

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

• assigned_to: Stefan Majewski

Original comment by: @hcayless

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Assigning to Stefan to implement.

Original comment by: @hcayless

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Reading through the remainder of the article I have the strong feeling that most other examples are sampa. I think this may have slipped. For consistency sake I would suggest changing the inline text.

The example for mackle, biryani hospitaler in DI read inline as: biryani or biriani (%bIrI"A:nI) mackle ("mak^@l) or macule ("makju:l) hospitaller or U.S. hospitaler ("hQspIt@l@) bevvy ("bEvI) Dialect

Or this might be a case where we could use the @notation which is defined for <pron>, to make clear that here we use IPA (as the source probably uses IPA while the source for the other is the OED which appear to all be using sampa.

I think I have to discuss this further, especially as I think this could be a good opportunity to also introduce @notation to the description.

Original comment by: @smjwsk

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

The use of @notation is definitely appropriate!

Original comment by: @laurentromary

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

You mean, @notation on the s with sensible transcriptions in them, and the latter is exactly Stefan's worry, and I don't envy him.

This is a mess. Sampa is used in inline examples for dictionaries that were around before Sampa existed. Next, cf. mackle: IPA in the XML (1st pronunciation), Sampa inline... SO wrong.

Next, what is "CED"? The reference expanded from the abbreviation is almost meaningless ("Collins English Dictionary. London: Collins"), given the multitude of editions of the CED. It may be the online version of CED, but that version has different text in its entries from what is provided in this chapter... The world and the CED have moved on, for sure, but the biblio reference does not indicate that.

Several procedures suggest themselves. One is: throw Sampa away altogether, this isn't meant to be a museum... Next: update the inline examples for what the referenced dictionaries REALLY provide (hint: it's not Sampa). Next, put the real pronunciation info into the XML examples, potentially using @notation and commenting on that briefly.

Ayes/nays?

Original comment by: @bansp

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

Council 2015-05-30: Stefan to implement Piotr's final suggestion:

Update the inline examples for what the referenced dictionaries REALLY provide (hint: it's not Sampa). Next, put the real pronunciation info into the XML examples, potentially using @notation and commenting on that briefly.

If there is difficulty in accessing originals of specific dictionaries, go to the rest of Council to see if their libraries have copies.

Original comment by: @martindholmes

[TEITechnicalCouncil]

• Group: AMBER --> GREEN

Original comment by: @martindholmes

[peterstadler]

Ok, I'am at it now. First, I'm searching for inline examples with references to dictionaries. The XPath

distinct-values(//q[ref]/ref/@target)

gives 10 distinct values for DI-PrintDictionaries.xml (English version! – I'm not dealing with the French chapter). In full (from BIB-Bibliography.xml) these are:

<listBibl>
  <bibl xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="DIC-CR">
    <editor>Atkins et al. </editor>
    <title>Collins Robert French-English English-French Dictionary</title>.
      <pubPlace>London</pubPlace>: <publisher>Collins</publisher> (<date>1978</date>) 
  </bibl>
  <bibl xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="DIC-CED">
    <title>Collins English Dictionary</title>. <pubPlace>London</pubPlace>:
      <publisher>Collins</publisher>
  </bibl>
  <bibl xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="DIC-CP">
    <title>Collins Pocket Dictionary of the English language</title>. <pubPlace>London</pubPlace>:
      <publisher>Collins</publisher>
  </bibl>
  <bibl xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="DIC-DNT">
    <editor>Guerard, Françoise</editor>. <title>Le Dictionnaire de Notre Temps</title>, ed.
      <pubPlace>Paris</pubPlace>: <publisher>Hachette</publisher>, <date>1990</date>
  </bibl>
  <bibl xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="DIC-OALD">
    <editor>Hornby, A.S. et al</editor>. <title>Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current
      English</title>. <publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher> (<date>1974</date>) </bibl>
  <bibl xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="DIC-LDOCE">
    <title>Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English</title>. <pubPlace>Harlow, Essex</pubPlace>:
      <publisher>Longman</publisher> (<date>1978</date>) </bibl>
  <bibl xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="DIC-NPEG">
    <title>The New Penguin English Dictionary</title>. <pubPlace>London</pubPlace>:
      <publisher>Penguin Books</publisher> (<date>1986</date>) </bibl>
  <bibl xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="DIC-PLC">
    <title>Petit Larousse en Couleurs</title>. <pubPlace>Paris</pubPlace>:
      <publisher>Larousse</publisher>, (<date>1990</date>) </bibl>
  <bibl xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="DIC-PR">
    <editor>Robert, Paul</editor>. <title>Le Petit Robert</title>. <pubPlace>Paris</pubPlace>:
      <publisher>Dictionnaires Le Robert</publisher> (<date>1967</date>) </bibl>
  <bibl xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="DIC-W7">
    <title>Webster's Seventh Collegiate Dictionary</title>. <pubPlace>Springfield, Mass. </pubPlace>
    <publisher>G. &amp; C. Merriam Co.</publisher> (<date>1975</date>) </bibl>
</listBibl>

I will update the <bibl> entries in the bibliography (if necessary) and check the respective examples. To be continued …

[martinascholger]

@peterstadler could you please summarise what is still open here? I saw that you have updated a number of examples. After a quick review, I see that the initial example has not yet been corrected (https://tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/DI.html#index-egXML-d54e78303). But it seems that there is more to do than just changing that example, right?