Modern titles in the critical view

[scottkleinman]

Our proposed practice of encoding "whole manuscripts" means that the text does not contain any sort of title in the critical view. So, in Laud Misc. 108, there will be no visible transition between vitae except for a line break or whatever CSS styling accompanies the <div1></div1><div1></div1>. That's fine for the diplomatic view, but for the critical view it would be nice to have something inline so that no convoluted processing is need to grab the title from the teiHeader. From the TEI Guidelines, the only thing that makes semantic sense to me is @n. So the code would look something like this:

<div1 n="Havelok the Dane">
...
</div1>
<div1 n="King Horn">
...
</div1>

This works just fine in my test viewer. Any reason why I shouldn't go ahead and add it to the encoding Guidelines?

[mmwwah]

Agreed that it would be nice to have.

In Junius 1, the titles of the homilies were added by Van Vliet in the early 1660s, so I’m not sure we need to add a second title. Thoughts?

meg

On 11 Sep 2016, at 18:48, Scott Kleinman notifications@github.com wrote:

Our proposed practice of encoding "whole manuscripts" means that the text does not contain any sort of title in the critical view. So, in Laud Misc. 108, there will be no visible transition between vitae except for a line break or whatever CSS styling accompanies the . That's fine for the diplomatic view, but for the critical view it would be nice to have something inline so that no convoluted processing is need to grab the title from the teiHeader. From the TEI Guidelines, the only thing that makes semantic sense to me is @n. So the code would look something like this:

... ...

This works just fine in my test viewer. Any reason why I shouldn't go ahead and add it to the encoding Guidelines?

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/scottkleinman/aeme/issues/92, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHcqCfD3rE8SKa8XkQJKakvOS18fEOXbks5qpIUwgaJpZM4J6IHA.

[scottkleinman]

Actually, I think we still need @n. Van Vliet's titles actually appear in the manuscript, so they should be encoded in the forme work. At present, that is only displayed in the diplomatic view. So we'll still need a separate way of displaying modern titles (even if they are taken from Van Vliet) in the critical view.

[mmwwah]

Oh, okay. I’d forgotten that forme work doesn’t appear in the CritV. I’ll get on it within the next couple of weeks, unless Sharon or Dokim mounts an objection.

meg

On 11 Sep 2016, at 19:28, Scott Kleinman notifications@github.com wrote:

Actually, I think we still need @n. Van Vliet's titles actually appear in the manuscript, so they should be encoded in the forme work. At present, that is only displayed in the diplomatic view. So we'll still need a separate way of displaying modern titles (even if they are taken from Van Vliet) in the critical view.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/scottkleinman/aeme/issues/92#issuecomment-246212012, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHcqCc6e3t20GV_ULaJjojn_zs1k00T2ks5qpI6agaJpZM4J6IHA.

[dorothyk98]

Works for me. -Dorothy

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 7:31 PM, mmwwah notifications@github.com wrote:

Oh, okay. I’d forgotten that forme work doesn’t appear in the CritV. I’ll get on it within the next couple of weeks, unless Sharon or Dokim mounts an objection.

meg

On 11 Sep 2016, at 19:28, Scott Kleinman notifications@github.com wrote:

Actually, I think we still need @n. Van Vliet's titles actually appear in the manuscript, so they should be encoded in the forme work. At present, that is only displayed in the diplomatic view. So we'll still need a separate way of displaying modern titles (even if they are taken from Van Vliet) in the critical view.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ scottkleinman/aeme/issues/92#issuecomment-246212012, or mute the thread < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHcqCc6e3t20GV_ULaJjojn_ zs1k00T2ks5qpI6agaJpZM4J6IHA>.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/scottkleinman/aeme/issues/92#issuecomment-246212147, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIO1tQt1RzEgXxtN5eN5oWN_oP6sh2S8ks5qpI80gaJpZM4J6IHA .

[skgoetz]

For somewhat less tag/attr abuse, how about <div1><title type="supplied">Havelok the Dane</title> [...] </div1>

[scottkleinman]

Thanks, Sharon. title is actually much better. Let's go with that. I'm so used to using it for bibliographical entries that I forgot about its existence.

However, it raises another question about features like Van Vliet's titles. Let's say you had something like:

<div1>
    <title resp="#modernEditor">I'm  a modern editorial title</title>
    <pb/>
    <fw type="guideWords" resp="#VanVliet" place="topCenter">I'm a title written in the manuscript</fw>
    ...
</div1>

This will render the title element in the critical view and the fw element in the diplomatic view. Personally, I'm not a fan of the @type categories we have inherited from PPEA. It might be better to use title inside fw for this. Doing so makes rendering the distinction between diplomatic and critical titles a bit more difficult, but not impossible. But then what to put in fw@type? Any ideas about how we might improve on the taxonomy for this attribute?