search

kingsdigitallab / crossreads

Palaeographical environment for CROSSREADS project
1 stars 0 forks source link

Renaming definitions without disrupting integrity #35

Open geoffroy-noel-ddh opened 1 year ago

geoffroy-noel-ddh commented 1 year ago

Check if changing the name of an allograph should be allowed.

The issue here is that the key won't be changed (b/c it might be used in annotation descriptions) and might therefore:

  1. be misleading
  2. clash with new allograph

Maybe the best would be to delete & recreated the allograph? But then what happens to associated CF & annotations?

As a test we should check that:

  1. key is not already take and generate variant if needed
  2. test suspicious keys which are too different from their label/character

Also check the same principles with script, component and feature.

In general correcting a typo in a script or component/feature is ok. But renaming Latin to Greek or A to B is looking for trouble.

simonastoyanova commented 4 months ago

I have a case for renaming two features: touching and not-touching to attached and detached. I have used them in numerous annotations, so if we do decide to rename them, basically it should be a find and replace of those two words within the whole repository. Happy to discuss in a call and decide how best to do it.