Project Update 3/17

[vidyasurti]

We had previously marked up our tragedies with the empty element <painStart/> and attributes <painStart rec, recGen, recNorm, painType, recRel, inf, infGen, infNorm, infRel/>. We finalized the schema to go over with Caroline throughout spring break.

• Github Repo Organization: Richa volunteered to tidy up the GitHub repository as it is getting unruly.
  • Collect all XML not actually used and put it into archive subdirectory repo
  • Medea has the actual XML source Medea_XML.xml which is a different document (delete the copy of Medea), but keep the initial changes document that Dr. Birnbaum made
• Schema:
  • Our schema was having problems with the TEI (specifically Medea and the other 3 tragedies being from different sources)
  • The group came to an agreement that we didn’t need to have the TEI in our schema for our analysis
  • Caroline suggested we use XSLT to create an XML document with everything without the TEI
  • Caroline will create the XSLT file
  • Vidya will have to change her attributes in that order to validate her XML against her schema. The specific order of the elements in the schema matters in terms of validity.
• XML Markup
  • We looked at the circumstances of the inflictor. Some of the inflictors, defined inflictors as indirect and direct: because they can be situational (no sentient infliction by person) or direct (sentient action that induces a reaction)
  • We decided to add another required attribute <painStart direct="yes"/> <painStart direct="no"/>because it introduces nuance to our project (Do women tend to have more emotional pain due to a situation? etc.)
• Site
  • Add something to the site page for the project.
  • Think about how we want to layout our site on paper (arrangement of the site)

[scanney]

Hi guys! It looks like you are making a lot of progress on your project thus far! Our team met today to speak our site page and reader view for our project as well! Each of us brought/ created some examples that we though would function well with our content, so I think that could be really helpful for your group as well! I noticed that you mentioned you had to go back and update the schema (not surprisingly, we did as well!) and I was wondering if you did so because it wasn't originally validating the stories, or just to be more efficient? I only ask because when looking at my own groups' marked up stories I saw that some of us had different ideas for where things went inside elements (for example, if 'metadata' would just be wrapped around an element, as an element itself) vs. or if they would be an attribute with different vales (for example, 'metadata' being an element with attributes of translator, year, story number, source). How did you decide o clarify this in you markdown file? I think it is given that people with instinctually have different ideas of which elements and attributes will go where, but given that, it didn't occur to us at first to clarify this in the schema! It seems like everyone in your group is on the same page though, so great job!

[jeh253]

It seems like you guys have gotten a lot done! I'm glad there didn't seem to be too many hurdles in switching project topics. This one seems really complex going on the method document you have, and I'm really excited to see what you come up with and to see how your analysis turns out. I think the direct/indirect attribute is an interesting touch to the markup and agree it adds a lot of nuance. I'm curious why you went with the milestone approach with your elements for your markup. Is it because there's a lot of text in between the start element and end element?