search

standardebooks / manual

The source code for the Standard Ebooks Manual of Style.
https://standardebooks.org/manual
Other
131 stars 33 forks source link

Shall we add genus to 8.2.12.2? #128

Open robinwhittleton opened 1 year ago

robinwhittleton commented 1 year ago

At the moment, 8.2.12.2 says ”Family, order, class, phylum or division, and kingdom names are capitalized but not italicized.” Shall we add genus and tribe to that?

(This arose from a question from a new producer who found an italicised reference to a monomial genus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleogyne.)

acabal commented 1 year ago

Yes, I suppose so. I think genus was excluded in the manual because in texts from the PD time period it wasn't usually capitalized. We would have to go back through the corpus and update things. There are quite a few instances where genus is not capitalized, and also quite a few instances where we'd have to look up if to see if it's referring to a genus or species. Not sure if you're interested in doing that. A rough search found 124 matches that need review.

se xpath "//*[contains(@epub:type, 'z3998:taxonomy') and re:test(., '^[a-z]')] /path/to/ebooks

robinwhittleton commented 1 year ago

Haha, yeah, dropped myself in that one. OK, I’ll get these fixed.

robinwhittleton commented 1 year ago

In this sentence, should we recommend wrapping the parts with <span epub:type="z3998:taxonomy"> too?

<p>A bonobo monkey is in the phylum Chordata, class Mammalia, order Primates.</p>

The spec for taxonomy suggests “the name of a species, genus or other taxonomic classification.”

robinwhittleton commented 1 year ago

Hmm, also: do we want to recommend xml:lang="la" for taxonomy too? There’s a mix in the corpus, most don’t.

acabal commented 1 year ago

In this sentence, should we recommend wrapping the parts with <span epub:type="z3998:taxonomy"> too?

<p>A bonobo monkey is in the phylum Chordata, class Mammalia, order Primates.</p>

The spec for taxonomy suggests “the name of a species, genus or other taxonomic classification.”

Eh, that's going down the rabbit hole of tagging things that wouldn't otherwise get tags. The general philosophy is that if it has a tag anyway, like <i>, then we may as well give it semantics. But adding tags just for the sake of semantics is optional, though accepted.

Hmm, also: do we want to recommend xml:lang="la" for taxonomy too? There’s a mix in the corpus, most don’t.

I would say no because taxonomies are more like proper names, and I don't think we pronounce them today in the way that Latin was spoken anyway.