Yes good point Martin, let's scratch that.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Martin Holmes
On 15-03-13 12:26 PM, Raffaele Viglianti wrote:
Hi all,
I just wanted to do a final check with you before acting on Bug 706 https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/706/.
The comments seem to favour imposing a reverse chronological order of changes on listChange, but that would contradict the role of the optional attribute @ordered.
Should we impose a reversed chronological order only when @ordered=true? Should we go as far as making @when required?
That's one thing you can't really do; it might be OK to make it a requirement that at least one dating attribute is there, but @when is not always the one you want to use. We often use @from with @to, and also @notBefore or @notAfter, not in combination.
Cheers, Martin
The examples on the guidelines suggest a reverse chronological order when
there is no @ordered and a chronological order when @ordered=true
http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-listChange.html
Thanks for your input, Raff
-- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived