The prose is new too, isn't it? On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:

I'd suggest removing the table for the moment. It doesn't express what the prose says and the prose was there first.

On 15/03/16 15:27, Syd Bauman wrote:

...

I'll take a look in a few hours ... In the meantime, did I commit my changes to TD and constrantSpec.xml properly?

1) The example immediately following the table contradicts the

...

information in the table in http://teic.github.io/TEI/ND.html#NDATTSda, because it has `@from`, `@notBefore`, and `@notAfter`.

2) Also, there's a French [example]( https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/blob/dev/P5/Source/Specs/att.datable.w3c.xml#L91 ) that uses `@when` in conjunction with `@notBefore` and `@notAfter`. I've switched the checks that enforce usage as outlined in the table to warnings, but we must fix `#1` and we should either remove the example in `#2` or change our minds about whether it's ok.

-- 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

Just so I understand then: @from + @notBefore and @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, between nB & nA" @from + @notBefore means "certain start; uncertain end, but after nB" @from + @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, but before nA" @notBefore and @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, between nB and nA; certain end" @notBefore + @to means "uncertain start, but after nB; certain end" @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, but before nA; certain end" @from + @to means "certain start; certain end" presumably then, @notBefore + notAfter can mean either "uncertain start, but after nB; uncertain end, but before nA" or "uncertain start, but before nA; uncertain end, but after nB", depending on whether nB > nA or vice versa. I think we need a bigger table... On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:

Not sure... but in any case, I think the prose is right.

On 15/03/16 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote:

...

The prose is new too, isn't it?

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

I'd suggest removing the table for the moment. It doesn't express what the

...

prose says and the prose was there first.

On 15/03/16 15:27, Syd Bauman wrote:

I'll take a look in a few hours ...

...

In the meantime, did I commit my changes to TD and constrantSpec.xml properly?

1) The example immediately following the table contradicts the

...

information in the table in http://teic.github.io/TEI/ND.html#NDATTSda, because it has `@from`, `@notBefore`, and `@notAfter`.

2) Also, there's a French [example](

https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/blob/dev/P5/Source/Specs/att.datable.w3c.xml#L91 ) that uses `@when` in conjunction with `@notBefore` and `@notAfter`. I've switched the checks that enforce usage as outlined in the table to warnings, but we must fix `#1` and we should either remove the example in `#2` or change our minds about whether it's ok.

-- 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

-- 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

Actually, now I think about it, it's worse. Your example assumes everything is a period of time, but many datable things are points in time, for which @from and @to are fairly meaningless. <death from="1900" to="1901"/> means someone took a very long time dying and is not the same as <death notafter="1901" notBefore="1900"/> My rule of thumb is that @notBefore and @notAfter should be used only to indicate a point in time (alone or in combination); only if there is a @from or @to present can we assume we're talking about a period of time. So if we want to express a period of time with an uncertain start AND end, either we need an extra pair of attributes (please, no), or we require the presence of @dur (so "a period of about 4 weeks between this vague date and that vague date"), or we just have to live with the fact that a date supplying @notBefore and @notAfter is inherently ambiguous as to whether it means some point in time or some span of time. On 15/03/16 16:08, Lou Burnard wrote:

Precisely. A 2d matrix can't cope with four variables...

Sent from my Honor Mobile

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [tei-council] [TEI] examples combines @from with @notAfter (#1331) From: Hugh Cayless To: TEI Council CC:

Just so I understand then:

@from + @notBefore and @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, between nB & nA" @from + @notBefore means "certain start; uncertain end, but after nB" @from + @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, but before nA" @notBefore and @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, between nB and nA; certain end" @notBefore + @to means "uncertain start, but after nB; certain end" @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, but before nA; certain end" @from + @to means "certain start; certain end" presumably then, @notBefore + notAfter can mean either "uncertain start, but after nB; uncertain end, but before nA" or "uncertain start, but before nA; uncertain end, but after nB", depending on whether nB > nA or vice versa.

I think we need a bigger table...

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:

...

Not sure... but in any case, I think the prose is right.

On 15/03/16 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote:

...

The prose is new too, isn't it?

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

I'd suggest removing the table for the moment. It doesn't express what the

...

prose says and the prose was there first.

On 15/03/16 15:27, Syd Bauman wrote:

I'll take a look in a few hours ...

...

In the meantime, did I commit my changes to TD and constrantSpec.xml properly?

1) The example immediately following the table contradicts the

...

information in the table in http://teic.github.io/TEI/ND.html#NDATTSda, because it has `@from`, `@notBefore`, and `@notAfter`.

2) Also, there's a French [example](

https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/blob/dev/P5/Source/Specs/att.datable.w3c.xml#L91 ) that uses `@when` in conjunction with `@notBefore` and `@notAfter`. I've switched the checks that enforce usage as outlined in the table to warnings, but we must fix `#1` and we should either remove the example in `#2` or change our minds about whether it's ok.

-- 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

-- 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

-- 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

Well that is my intuitive understanding too, but the question is what it means when you supply both of them. I agree that most elements are pretty clear as to whether they define a single point or a duration, but not all. What about <event> for starters, or <affiliation> : you might want to say someone was affiliated with something at some (imprecise) moment, or you might want to say they were affiliated for some (imprecise) period of time. On 15/03/16 16:58, Hugh Cayless wrote:

My intuitive understanding of @notBefore/@notAfter was that @notBefore only applied to beginnings or single points in time and @notAfter only applied to ends or single points in time. Essentially that @notBefore == "terminus post quem" and @notAfter == "terminus ante quem".

Are there any elements where it's ambiguous whether they're a single point in time or a duration? I don't think <death> is one of them...

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Lou Burnard wrote:

...

Actually, now I think about it, it's worse. Your example assumes everything is a period of time, but many datable things are points in time, for which @from and @to are fairly meaningless. <death from="1900" to="1901"/> means someone took a very long time dying and is not the same as <death notafter="1901" notBefore="1900"/>

My rule of thumb is that @notBefore and @notAfter should be used only to indicate a point in time (alone or in combination); only if there is a @from or @to present can we assume we're talking about a period of time. So if we want to express a period of time with an uncertain start AND end, either we need an extra pair of attributes (please, no), or we require the presence of @dur (so "a period of about 4 weeks between this vague date and that vague date"), or we just have to live with the fact that a date supplying @notBefore and @notAfter is inherently ambiguous as to whether it means some point in time or some span of time.

On 15/03/16 16:08, Lou Burnard wrote:

...

Precisely. A 2d matrix can't cope with four variables...

Sent from my Honor Mobile

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [tei-council] [TEI] examples combines @from with @notAfter (#1331) From: Hugh Cayless To: TEI Council CC:

Just so I understand then:

@from + @notBefore and @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, between nB & nA" @from + @notBefore means "certain start; uncertain end, but after nB" @from + @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, but before nA" @notBefore and @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, between nB and nA; certain end" @notBefore + @to means "uncertain start, but after nB; certain end" @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, but before nA; certain end" @from + @to means "certain start; certain end" presumably then, @notBefore + notAfter can mean either "uncertain start, but after nB; uncertain end, but before nA" or "uncertain start, but before nA; uncertain end, but after nB", depending on whether nB > nA or vice versa.

I think we need a bigger table...

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

Not sure... but in any case, I think the prose is right.

...

On 15/03/16 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote:

The prose is new too, isn't it?

...

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

I'd suggest removing the table for the moment. It doesn't express what the

...

prose says and the prose was there first.

On 15/03/16 15:27, Syd Bauman wrote:

I'll take a look in a few hours ...

> In the meantime, did I commit my changes to TD and constrantSpec.xml > properly? > > 1) The example immediately following the table contradicts the > > information in the table in >> http://teic.github.io/TEI/ND.html#NDATTSda, because it has >> `@from`, `@notBefore`, and `@notAfter`. >> >> 2) Also, there's a French >> [example]( >> >> >> https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/blob/dev/P5/Source/Specs/att.datable.w3c.xml#L91 >> ) >> that uses `@when` in conjunction with `@notBefore` and `@notAfter`. >> I've switched the checks that enforce usage as outlined in the >> table to warnings, but we must fix `#1` and we should either remove >> the example in `#2` or change our minds about whether it's ok. >> >> -- >> > 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

-- 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

--

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

-- 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

Only if we want to make a distinction between "Hugh became chairman sometime between 1976 and 2017" and "Hugh was chairman for some indeterminate period between 1976 and 2017" but i am quite happy to let this sleeping dog lie On 15/03/16 17:25, Hugh Cayless wrote:

Well, I'd say @notBefore and @notAfter together indicate a period of time within which the thing indicated by their parent element happened. That happening may itself have a duration, or it may be instantaneous. Do we really need to care about whether it does or not?

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Lou Burnard wrote:

...

Well that is my intuitive understanding too, but the question is what it means when you supply both of them.

I agree that most elements are pretty clear as to whether they define a single point or a duration, but not all. What about <event> for starters, or <affiliation> : you might want to say someone was affiliated with something at some (imprecise) moment, or you might want to say they were affiliated for some (imprecise) period of time.

On 15/03/16 16:58, Hugh Cayless wrote:

...

My intuitive understanding of @notBefore/@notAfter was that @notBefore only applied to beginnings or single points in time and @notAfter only applied to ends or single points in time. Essentially that @notBefore == "terminus post quem" and @notAfter == "terminus ante quem".

Are there any elements where it's ambiguous whether they're a single point in time or a duration? I don't think <death> is one of them...

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

Actually, now I think about it, it's worse. Your example assumes

...

everything is a period of time, but many datable things are points in time, for which @from and @to are fairly meaningless. <death from="1900" to="1901"/> means someone took a very long time dying and is not the same as <death notafter="1901" notBefore="1900"/>

My rule of thumb is that @notBefore and @notAfter should be used only to indicate a point in time (alone or in combination); only if there is a @from or @to present can we assume we're talking about a period of time. So if we want to express a period of time with an uncertain start AND end, either we need an extra pair of attributes (please, no), or we require the presence of @dur (so "a period of about 4 weeks between this vague date and that vague date"), or we just have to live with the fact that a date supplying @notBefore and @notAfter is inherently ambiguous as to whether it means some point in time or some span of time.

On 15/03/16 16:08, Lou Burnard wrote:

Precisely. A 2d matrix can't cope with four variables...

...

Sent from my Honor Mobile

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [tei-council] [TEI] examples combines @from with @notAfter (#1331) From: Hugh Cayless To: TEI Council CC:

Just so I understand then:

@from + @notBefore and @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, between nB & nA" @from + @notBefore means "certain start; uncertain end, but after nB" @from + @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, but before nA" @notBefore and @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, between nB and nA; certain end" @notBefore + @to means "uncertain start, but after nB; certain end" @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, but before nA; certain end" @from + @to means "certain start; certain end" presumably then, @notBefore + notAfter can mean either "uncertain start, but after nB; uncertain end, but before nA" or "uncertain start, but before nA; uncertain end, but after nB", depending on whether nB > nA or vice versa.

I think we need a bigger table...

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

Not sure... but in any case, I think the prose is right.

...

On 15/03/16 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote:

The prose is new too, isn't it?

> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Lou Burnard < > lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> > wrote: > > I'd suggest removing the table for the moment. It doesn't express what > the > > prose says and the prose was there first. >> >> >> On 15/03/16 15:27, Syd Bauman wrote: >> >> I'll take a look in a few hours ... >> >> In the meantime, did I commit my changes to TD and constrantSpec.xml >>> properly? >>> >>> 1) The example immediately following the table contradicts the >>> >>> information in the table in >>> >>>> http://teic.github.io/TEI/ND.html#NDATTSda, because it has >>>> `@from`, `@notBefore`, and `@notAfter`. >>>> >>>> 2) Also, there's a French >>>> [example]( >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/blob/dev/P5/Source/Specs/att.datable.w3c.xml#L91 >>>> ) >>>> that uses `@when` in conjunction with `@notBefore` and `@notAfter`. >>>> I've switched the checks that enforce usage as outlined in the >>>> table to warnings, but we must fix `#1` and we should either remove >>>> the example in `#2` or change our minds about whether it's ok. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> 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 >> >> >> -- >> > 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

--

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

-- 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

-- 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

I think they always indicate a period. The aspect of the event in question is a characteristic of the event. You can infer the event's aspect from @from/@to, but not from @notBefore/@notAfter. I don't think that constitutes a bug though. On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Lou Burnard wrote:

also, note that if you take the view that @notBefore and @notAfter indicate a period rather than a point in the absence of @to or @from, you are giving them a different meaning conditional on the presence of some other attribute/s. which is kind of a weird thing to do.

On 15/03/16 17:30, Lou Burnard wrote:

...

Only if we want to make a distinction between "Hugh became chairman sometime between 1976 and 2017" and "Hugh was chairman for some indeterminate period between 1976 and 2017"

but i am quite happy to let this sleeping dog lie

On 15/03/16 17:25, Hugh Cayless wrote:

...

Well, I'd say @notBefore and @notAfter together indicate a period of time within which the thing indicated by their parent element happened. That happening may itself have a duration, or it may be instantaneous. Do we really need to care about whether it does or not?

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

Well that is my intuitive understanding too, but the question is what it

...

means when you supply both of them.

I agree that most elements are pretty clear as to whether they define a single point or a duration, but not all. What about <event> for starters, or <affiliation> : you might want to say someone was affiliated with something at some (imprecise) moment, or you might want to say they were affiliated for some (imprecise) period of time.

On 15/03/16 16:58, Hugh Cayless wrote:

My intuitive understanding of @notBefore/@notAfter was that @notBefore

...

only applied to beginnings or single points in time and @notAfter only applied to ends or single points in time. Essentially that @notBefore == "terminus post quem" and @notAfter == "terminus ante quem".

Are there any elements where it's ambiguous whether they're a single point in time or a duration? I don't think <death> is one of them...

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

Actually, now I think about it, it's worse. Your example assumes

...

everything is a period of time, but many datable things are points in time, for which @from and @to are fairly meaningless. <death from="1900" to="1901"/> means someone took a very long time dying and is not the same as <death notafter="1901" notBefore="1900"/>

My rule of thumb is that @notBefore and @notAfter should be used only to indicate a point in time (alone or in combination); only if there is a @from or @to present can we assume we're talking about a period of time. So if we want to express a period of time with an uncertain start AND end, either we need an extra pair of attributes (please, no), or we require the presence of @dur (so "a period of about 4 weeks between this vague date and that vague date"), or we just have to live with the fact that a date supplying @notBefore and @notAfter is inherently ambiguous as to whether it means some point in time or some span of time.

On 15/03/16 16:08, Lou Burnard wrote:

Precisely. A 2d matrix can't cope with four variables...

> Sent from my Honor Mobile > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [tei-council] [TEI] examples combines @from with > @notAfter > (#1331) > From: Hugh Cayless > To: TEI Council > CC: > > Just so I understand then: > > @from + @notBefore and @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, > between nB & nA" > @from + @notBefore means "certain start; uncertain end, but after nB" > @from + @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, but before nA" > @notBefore and @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, between nB and > nA; > certain end" > @notBefore + @to means "uncertain start, but after nB; certain end" > @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, but before nA; certain end" > @from + @to means "certain start; certain end" > presumably then, > @notBefore + notAfter can mean either "uncertain start, but after nB; > uncertain end, but before nA" or "uncertain start, but before nA; > uncertain > end, but after nB", depending on whether nB > nA or vice versa. > > I think we need a bigger table... > > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Lou Burnard < > lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> > wrote: > > Not sure... but in any case, I think the prose is right. > > >> On 15/03/16 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote: >> >> The prose is new too, isn't it? >> >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Lou Burnard < >>> lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I'd suggest removing the table for the moment. It doesn't express >>> what >>> the >>> >>> prose says and the prose was there first. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 15/03/16 15:27, Syd Bauman wrote: >>>> >>>> I'll take a look in a few hours ... >>>> >>>> In the meantime, did I commit my changes to TD and >>>> constrantSpec.xml >>>> >>>>> properly? >>>>> >>>>> 1) The example immediately following the table contradicts the >>>>> >>>>> information in the table in >>>>> >>>>> http://teic.github.io/TEI/ND.html#NDATTSda, because it has >>>>>> `@from`, `@notBefore`, and `@notAfter`. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2) Also, there's a French >>>>>> [example]( >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/blob/dev/P5/Source/Specs/att.datable.w3c.xml#L91 >>>>>> ) >>>>>> that uses `@when` in conjunction with `@notBefore` and >>>>>> `@notAfter`. >>>>>> I've switched the checks that enforce usage as outlined in the >>>>>> table to warnings, but we must fix `#1` and we should either >>>>>> remove >>>>>> the example in `#2` or change our minds about whether it's ok. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> 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 >> >> -- >> >> 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 > > -- > 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

-- 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

-- 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

I don't quite agree with that actually. I think @notBefore/@notAfter *always* indicate a period, but they don't say anything about the nature of the element to which they're attached. @from/@to also always indicate a period, but they *do* say something about the nature of the element they're attached to. The question is whether that's a problem. I'm not convinced that it is... I think we might agree though that the example in question is going out of bounds, because it introduces another ambiguity: whether @notBefore/@notAfter refer to the start or end of a period. On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Lou Burnard wrote:

i dont think we disagree on how to interpret these attributes: just in the degree of importance we attach to the following asymettry:

@to or @from plus @notBefore and/or @notAfter must mean a period and if supplied on some element which denotes a point are therefore erroneous; whereas @notBefore and/or @notAfter means a period if supplied on an element which denotes one, or a point if supplied on some element which denotes a point.

On 15/03/16 17:41, Hugh Cayless wrote:

...

I think they always indicate a period. The aspect of the event in question is a characteristic of the event. You can infer the event's aspect from @from/@to, but not from @notBefore/@notAfter. I don't think that constitutes a bug though.

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

also, note that if you take the view that @notBefore and @notAfter

...

indicate a period rather than a point in the absence of @to or @from, you are giving them a different meaning conditional on the presence of some other attribute/s. which is kind of a weird thing to do.

On 15/03/16 17:30, Lou Burnard wrote:

Only if we want to make a distinction between

...

"Hugh became chairman sometime between 1976 and 2017" and "Hugh was chairman for some indeterminate period between 1976 and 2017"

but i am quite happy to let this sleeping dog lie

On 15/03/16 17:25, Hugh Cayless wrote:

Well, I'd say @notBefore and @notAfter together indicate a period of

...

time within which the thing indicated by their parent element happened. That happening may itself have a duration, or it may be instantaneous. Do we really need to care about whether it does or not?

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

Well that is my intuitive understanding too, but the question is what it

...

means when you supply both of them.

I agree that most elements are pretty clear as to whether they define a single point or a duration, but not all. What about <event> for starters, or <affiliation> : you might want to say someone was affiliated with something at some (imprecise) moment, or you might want to say they were affiliated for some (imprecise) period of time.

On 15/03/16 16:58, Hugh Cayless wrote:

My intuitive understanding of @notBefore/@notAfter was that @notBefore

> only > applied to beginnings or single points in time and @notAfter only > applied > to ends or single points in time. Essentially that @notBefore == > "terminus > post quem" and @notAfter == "terminus ante quem". > > Are there any elements where it's ambiguous whether they're a single > point > in time or a duration? I don't think <death> is one of them... > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Lou Burnard < > lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> > wrote: > > Actually, now I think about it, it's worse. Your example assumes > > everything is a period of time, but many datable things are points in >> time, >> for which @from and @to are fairly meaningless. >> <death from="1900" to="1901"/> means someone took a very long time >> dying >> and is not the same as <death notafter="1901" notBefore="1900"/> >> >> My rule of thumb is that @notBefore and @notAfter should be used >> only >> to >> indicate a point in time (alone or in combination); only if there >> is a >> @from or @to present can we assume we're talking about >> a period of time. So if we want to express a period of time with an >> uncertain start AND end, either we need an extra pair of attributes >> (please, no), or we require the presence of @dur (so "a period of >> about 4 >> weeks between this vague date and that vague date"), or we just have >> to >> live with the fact that a date supplying @notBefore and @notAfter is >> inherently ambiguous as to whether it means some point in time or >> some >> span >> of time. >> >> >> >> On 15/03/16 16:08, Lou Burnard wrote: >> >> Precisely. A 2d matrix can't cope with four variables... >> >> Sent from my Honor Mobile >>> >>> -------- Original Message -------- >>> Subject: Re: [tei-council] [TEI] examples combines @from with >>> @notAfter >>> (#1331) >>> From: Hugh Cayless >>> To: TEI Council >>> CC: >>> >>> Just so I understand then: >>> >>> @from + @notBefore and @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain >>> end, >>> between nB & nA" >>> @from + @notBefore means "certain start; uncertain end, but after >>> nB" >>> @from + @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, but before >>> nA" >>> @notBefore and @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, between nB >>> and >>> nA; >>> certain end" >>> @notBefore + @to means "uncertain start, but after nB; certain end" >>> @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, but before nA; certain end" >>> @from + @to means "certain start; certain end" >>> presumably then, >>> @notBefore + notAfter can mean either "uncertain start, but after >>> nB; >>> uncertain end, but before nA" or "uncertain start, but before nA; >>> uncertain >>> end, but after nB", depending on whether nB > nA or vice versa. >>> >>> I think we need a bigger table... >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Lou Burnard < >>> lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Not sure... but in any case, I think the prose is right. >>> >>> >>> On 15/03/16 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote: >>>> >>>> The prose is new too, isn't it? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Lou Burnard < >>>> >>>>> lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I'd suggest removing the table for the moment. It doesn't express >>>>> what >>>>> the >>>>> >>>>> prose says and the prose was there first. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 15/03/16 15:27, Syd Bauman wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll take a look in a few hours ... >>>>>> >>>>>> In the meantime, did I commit my changes to TD and >>>>>> constrantSpec.xml >>>>>> >>>>>> properly? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1) The example immediately following the table contradicts the >>>>>>> >>>>>>> information in the table in >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://teic.github.io/TEI/ND.html#NDATTSda, because it has >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> `@from`, `@notBefore`, and `@notAfter`. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2) Also, there's a French >>>>>>>> [example]( >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/blob/dev/P5/Source/Specs/att.datable.w3c.xml#L91 >>>>>>>> ) >>>>>>>> that uses `@when` in conjunction with `@notBefore` and >>>>>>>> `@notAfter`. >>>>>>>> I've switched the checks that enforce usage as outlined in the >>>>>>>> table to warnings, but we must fix `#1` and we should either >>>>>>>> remove >>>>>>>> the example in `#2` or change our minds about whether it's ok. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> 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 >>> >>> -- >>> >>> 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 >> >> >> -- >> > 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

-- 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

-- 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

apologies for making yr head spin. i dont disagree with any of that summary. The problem is in the following example which appears in att.datable.w3c <egXML xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/Examples" source="#fr-ex-Laclos-liaisons"> <opener> <dateline><placeName>Paris,</placeName>, ce <date when="--12-11" notBefore="1699-12-31" notAfter="1799-12-31">11 décembre 17.. </date></dateline> <salute>à Madame De Rosemonde.,</salute> </opener> </egXML> I think this example is trying to be too clever. It provides two normalisations of the date "11 decembre 17..", one using @when, the other using the combination of @notBefore and @notAfter. Either on its own would be fine, but both together is needlessly confusing. I'd suggest simply removing the @when one, since we've already got examples of that way of indicating an imprecise date. On 16/03/16 21:33, Syd Bauman wrote:

Lou and Hugh, you've made my head spin and in large parts seem to be somewhat off the ranch. I believe you wholeheartedly if you say I made a mistake, but could you point out exactly what that mistake is?

To recap the current released status:

* @from & @to designate a duration

* @notBefore & @notAfter designate a range during which something happened (that thing may have happened instantly or over a duration)

* The Guidelines do not explain what any of the following combinations mean: - @from & @notBefore - @from & @notAfter - @to & @notBefore - @to & @notAfter - @when & any of @from, @to, @notBefore, @notAfter

To recap the issue:

* I complained that an example in the GLs used a combination for which there was no meaning; I thought we should change the example so it used a combination we explain.

* Council said "No, Syd, that's a perfectly valid combination, the prose of the GLs should be changed to explain what each combination means -- we need a table".

* I said "OK, I'll go do that", not remotely realizing how hard it is to generate a decent looking table.

To recap the discussion:

* James, at least, and I think one or two others, asserted (w/o objection) that any combination that includes @from or @to is definitionally a duration, not a range, even if @notBefore or @notAfter is present.

* Peter, James, and I each asserted (initially w/o objection) that any of @from, @to, @notBefore, or @notAfter makes no sense with @when; therefore those combinations should not be permitted.

* Later Hugh pointed out that there is an example with the use of @when, @notAfter, and @notBefore in the GLs -- so maybe those combinations should be allowed.

To recap my changes:

* Added the table to explain what each of the following 2-attribute combinations mean - @from & @to (duration) - @notBefore & @notAfter (range) - @from & @notAfter (duration, uncertain endpoint) - @to & @notBefore (duration, uncertain beginning)

* Added prose to explain what the following 3-attribute combinations mean - @from, @notBefore, @notAfter (duration, uncertain endpoint) - @to, @notBefore, @notAfter (duration, uncertain beginning)

* Added some examples

I hope to address Hugh's post on the ticket (#1331) in a few mins.

I'll add that I think Syd's example—which is a good one, even though it's broken according to the definitions in his table—may point us at the need to think about how to model events and their durations in a more sophisticated way. On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Hugh Cayless wrote:

Well, I'd say @notBefore and @notAfter together indicate a period of time within which the thing indicated by their parent element happened. That happening may itself have a duration, or it may be instantaneous. Do we really need to care about whether it does or not?

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Lou Burnard

...

wrote:

...

Well that is my intuitive understanding too, but the question is what it means when you supply both of them.

I agree that most elements are pretty clear as to whether they define a single point or a duration, but not all. What about <event> for starters, or <affiliation> : you might want to say someone was affiliated with something at some (imprecise) moment, or you might want to say they were affiliated for some (imprecise) period of time.

On 15/03/16 16:58, Hugh Cayless wrote:

...

My intuitive understanding of @notBefore/@notAfter was that @notBefore only applied to beginnings or single points in time and @notAfter only applied to ends or single points in time. Essentially that @notBefore == "terminus post quem" and @notAfter == "terminus ante quem".

Are there any elements where it's ambiguous whether they're a single point in time or a duration? I don't think <death> is one of them...

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

Actually, now I think about it, it's worse. Your example assumes

...

everything is a period of time, but many datable things are points in time, for which @from and @to are fairly meaningless. <death from="1900" to="1901"/> means someone took a very long time dying and is not the same as <death notafter="1901" notBefore="1900"/>

My rule of thumb is that @notBefore and @notAfter should be used only to indicate a point in time (alone or in combination); only if there is a @from or @to present can we assume we're talking about a period of time. So if we want to express a period of time with an uncertain start AND end, either we need an extra pair of attributes (please, no), or we require the presence of @dur (so "a period of about 4 weeks between this vague date and that vague date"), or we just have to live with the fact that a date supplying @notBefore and @notAfter is inherently ambiguous as to whether it means some point in time or some span of time.

On 15/03/16 16:08, Lou Burnard wrote:

Precisely. A 2d matrix can't cope with four variables...

...

Sent from my Honor Mobile

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [tei-council] [TEI] examples combines @from with @notAfter (#1331) From: Hugh Cayless To: TEI Council CC:

Just so I understand then:

@from + @notBefore and @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, between nB & nA" @from + @notBefore means "certain start; uncertain end, but after nB" @from + @notAfter means "certain start; uncertain end, but before nA" @notBefore and @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, between nB and nA; certain end" @notBefore + @to means "uncertain start, but after nB; certain end" @notAfter + @to means "uncertain start, but before nA; certain end" @from + @to means "certain start; certain end" presumably then, @notBefore + notAfter can mean either "uncertain start, but after nB; uncertain end, but before nA" or "uncertain start, but before nA; uncertain end, but after nB", depending on whether nB > nA or vice versa.

I think we need a bigger table...

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

Not sure... but in any case, I think the prose is right.

...

On 15/03/16 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote:

The prose is new too, isn't it?

> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Lou Burnard < > lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> > wrote: > > I'd suggest removing the table for the moment. It doesn't express > what > the > > prose says and the prose was there first. >> >> >> >> On 15/03/16 15:27, Syd Bauman wrote: >> >> I'll take a look in a few hours ... >> >> In the meantime, did I commit my changes to TD and constrantSpec.xml >>> properly? >>> >>> 1) The example immediately following the table contradicts the >>> >>> information in the table in >>> >>>> http://teic.github.io/TEI/ND.html#NDATTSda, because it has >>>> `@from`, `@notBefore`, and `@notAfter`. >>>> >>>> 2) Also, there's a French >>>> [example]( >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/blob/dev/P5/Source/Specs/att.datable.w3c.xml#L91 >>>> ) >>>> that uses `@when` in conjunction with `@notBefore` and >>>> `@notAfter`. >>>> I've switched the checks that enforce usage as outlined in the >>>> table to warnings, but we must fix `#1` and we should either >>>> remove >>>> the example in `#2` or change our minds about whether it's ok. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> 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 >> >> >> -- >> > 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

--

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

--

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

-- 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