<equiv> should get the @predicate attribute

[jamescummings]

The <equiv> element should get the same or similarly defined @predicate attribute that is available on <model>. This would enable filtered equivalences for all sorts of uses, but for example being able to map uses of a single element to different conceptual models. i.e. <name type="person"> could map to one concept in (say) CIDOC CRM or other ontologies but <name type="place"> could map to another. These would be documented in the ODD not in the document instance. This strikes me as a very flexible addition to equiv that is easy to implement.

[sydb]

Council VF2F subgroup thinks this is overall a good idea. Probably @predicate should be put in a class since it is also on <model> and <modelGrp>.

[peterstadler]

Regarding creating a new class for the attribute @predicate, the hardest thing (as always) is the name. I considered the following and would like some feedback:

• att.conditional or att.conditionalExpression: my favorite so far, has no(?) terminological overlap with current TEI attributes and classes
• att.matching: closer to xsl template matches (what @predicate is used for here), but has some overlap with the @match attribute – and we probably won't stick the @match attribute into this new class …
• att.filtering: @jamescummings asked to "enable filtered equivalences"; and we could put the current @filter attribute from <equiv> into this class (ha!), but then <model> and <modelSequence> would also get this attribute without(?) need.

[sydb]

Umm … of your choices I tihnk I like att.conditionalExpression the best, but what is wrong with either att.predicate or att.XPathPredicate?

[sydb]

(Although att.filtering is good, too; I do not like att.conditional or att.matching nearly as much.)

If there is a use for @filter on <model>, though, that is a game-changer and att.filtering wins.

[peterstadler]

If there is a use for @filter on <model>, though, that is a game-changer and att.filtering wins.

maybe @tuurma might have an opinion on this? Do you see some benefit for @filter on <model>?

[tuurma]

No, thanks, @predicate is all we need for models and @filter there would be utterly confusing. As for the name, att.conditional is fine with me, att.predicate would be fine too. I would vote against att.XPathPredicate, it's long and overly prescriptive.

[peterstadler]

Thanks @sydb and @tuurma – will proceed with att.predicate and file a PR