If you search for the string "gloss" in http://teijenkins.hcmc.uvic.ca/job/TEIP5/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/P5/rel... you will find that quite a few of our example <list>s that have type=gloss are not glossary lists at all. I'm not suggesting that we should try to fix this before release, but if I don't mention it now I'll forget. James -- BTW, this was discovered by Sarah Connell, who you met just a few hours ago. (She was the one in blue running the meeting.)
On 15-10-07 02:00 PM, Syd Bauman wrote:
If you search for the string "gloss" in http://teijenkins.hcmc.uvic.ca/job/TEIP5/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/P5/rel... you will find that quite a few of our example <list>s that have type=gloss are not glossary lists at all.
I'm not suggesting that we should try to fix this before release, but if I don't mention it now I'll forget.
I'll file a ticket. This is a by-product of the old setup whereby rendition/form was confused with typology; these strange instances of @type="gloss" really seem to be indicating "I consist of label/item pairs", perhaps intending "therefore I should be processed in a specific way". The definition of "glossary" in the OED does not seem in any way to support this as a descriptor for a school report or the "list of Celia's charms" from chapter CO. Cheers, Martin
James -- BTW, this was discovered by Sarah Connell, who you met just a few hours ago. (She was the one in blue running the meeting.)
participants (2)
-
Martin Holmes -
Syd Bauman