Open dlschwartz opened 1 year ago
We will allow either @source
or @resp
on tei:note and tei:desc and require it if there is not child::tei:quote. tei:quote will always require a @source
.
This has been implemented in the ODD but I will keep this open because it needs to be documented.
These elements present some challenges for documentation (using either
@source
or@resp
).In general, we have thought in terms of either
@source
or@resp
as allowed but not required on tei:desc and tei:note.@source
or@resp
@source
or@resp
@source
or@resp
Optional but not required seems appropriate then. But what about when we have a tei:quote child of a tei:note or tei:desc? My initial thought was simply to require
@source
on all tei:quote elements. But that doesn't fit with current practice.Persons:
@source
att. In each of those cases, there is a@source
on the parent::tei:note.@source
att value on the parent::tei:note. (That doesn't seem right.)Places:
@source
. In only 3/144 cases is there a parent::tei:desc with a@source
att. This means that in 141 cases, there is no documentation for quotations on either element, tei:note or tei:quote.Two possible solutions (neither of which I'm thrilled with):
@source
for a tei:quote on the parent tei:note or tei:desc. This would be easy for Winona to find and easy to serialize into RDF. However, this wouldn't work if we had multiple tei:quote element descendants. Should we allow only one?@source
or@resp
on tei:note and tei:desc unless they contain a descendant::tei:quote that would have to have a@source
att. This solves the problem of multiple tei:quote elements but makes it harder to find documentation and makes it unclear how to serialize into RDF, especially if we have multiple tei:quote elements.