In early Praat transcriptions the annotations contained different tiers for each vowels, semi-vowels/glides/nasals, consonants, tones..(as well as the orthographic form and a gloss). In the phonetic transcriptions in TEI these were output as <c> and the tones are output as <c function="tone">↗</c>
The <c>'s make the phonetic content nearly unsearchable and the inconsistant encodings make for a less harmonious and usable data set.
Other than the issue of marking and annotating tones when they mark a specific linguistic feature (see issue #88 discusses the tagging of the phonetic components, and proposes changing <c> to <m> for tones), unless I add the times to them directly, there is absolutely no functional benefit of keeping the <c>'s.
In the case that I want to perform systematic study of these contents, this can be best done in Praat without the TEI.
In early Praat transcriptions the annotations contained different tiers for each vowels, semi-vowels/glides/nasals, consonants, tones..(as well as the orthographic form and a gloss). In the phonetic transcriptions in TEI these were output as
<c>
and the tones are output as<c function="tone">↗</c>
The new ones in which I only transcribe the full phonetic word are output as follows:
The
<c>
's make the phonetic content nearly unsearchable and the inconsistant encodings make for a less harmonious and usable data set.Other than the issue of marking and annotating tones when they mark a specific linguistic feature (see issue #88 discusses the tagging of the phonetic components, and proposes changing
<c>
to<m>
for tones), unless I add the times to them directly, there is absolutely no functional benefit of keeping the<c>
's.In the case that I want to perform systematic study of these contents, this can be best done in Praat without the TEI.
So @Laurent do you approve of this change?