The process of TEI content models proceeds apace and (as might be expected) is turning up a few oddities in some unfrequented corners. For example, the content model of <langUsage> is currently (in the source) <content> <oneOrMore xmlns="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"> <choice> <!-- <rng:ref name="p"/>--> <ref name="language"/> </choice> </oneOrMore> </content> Now, this is clearly nonsense : you can't have an alternation with just one option. But did we really want to remove the possibility for having a purely documentary <langUsage> such as <p>Contains various unrecognised Polynesian languages</p>? Can anyone remember why we made this change ? I would have expected to see something like <choice> <oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="model.pLike"/> </oneOrMore> <oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="language"/> </oneOrMore> myself.
I agree it’s very odd. It appears to have been that way as long as svn has history for the spec file. See https://github.com/TEIC/Guidelines-TEST/blob/4a7d8e58ac5c3cd7d00a2af378975e1... <https://github.com/TEIC/Guidelines-TEST/blob/4a7d8e58ac5c3cd7d00a2af378975e1c1c2f21ce/P5/Source/Specs/langUsage.xml> So it’s been busted for at least almost a decade...
On Aug 10, 2015, at 4:24 , Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@RETIRED.OX.AC.UK> wrote:
The process of TEI content models proceeds apace and (as might be expected) is turning up a few oddities in some unfrequented corners.
For example, the content model of <langUsage> is currently (in the source)
<content> <oneOrMore xmlns="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"> <choice> <!-- <rng:ref name="p"/>--> <ref name="language"/> </choice> </oneOrMore> </content>
Now, this is clearly nonsense : you can't have an alternation with just one option. But did we really want to remove the possibility for having a purely documentary <langUsage> such as <p>Contains various unrecognised Polynesian languages</p>?
Can anyone remember why we made this change ? I would have expected to see something like
<choice> <oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="model.pLike"/> </oneOrMore> <oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="language"/> </oneOrMore>
myself.
-- 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
Looks like it was removed by one Lou Burnard in November 2005: commit 6e8d0575599eb72187e3613c36985e3fa407c42c Author: louburnard <louburnard@e5332ce4-a50f-0410-b94b-d658400b0204> Date: Mon Nov 7 00:02:22 2005 +0000 Removed p from content model git-svn-id: svn+ssh://svn.code.sf.net/p/tei/code/trunk@1004 e5332ce4-a50f-0410-b94b-d658400b0204 diff --git a/P5/Source/HD/langusg.odd b/P5/Source/HD/langusg.odd index 810f61e..73d83d5 100644 --- a/P5/Source/HD/langusg.odd +++ b/P5/Source/HD/langusg.odd @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ represented within a text.</desc> <content> <rng:oneOrMore xmlns:rng="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"> <rng:choice> - <rng:ref name="p"/> +<!-- <rng:ref name="p"/>--> <rng:ref name="language"/> </rng:choice> </rng:oneOrMore> I can’t remember what I was doing on November 2005, so I wouldn’t expect you to :-), but there must have been some reason for it...
On Aug 10, 2015, at 7:26 , Hugh Cayless <philomousos@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree it’s very odd. It appears to have been that way as long as svn has history for the spec file. See https://github.com/TEIC/Guidelines-TEST/blob/4a7d8e58ac5c3cd7d00a2af378975e1... <https://github.com/TEIC/Guidelines-TEST/blob/4a7d8e58ac5c3cd7d00a2af378975e1c1c2f21ce/P5/Source/Specs/langUsage.xml>
So it’s been busted for at least almost a decade...
On Aug 10, 2015, at 4:24 , Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@RETIRED.OX.AC.UK <mailto:lou.burnard@RETIRED.OX.AC.UK>> wrote:
The process of TEI content models proceeds apace and (as might be expected) is turning up a few oddities in some unfrequented corners.
For example, the content model of <langUsage> is currently (in the source)
<content> <oneOrMore xmlns="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0 <http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0>"> <choice> <!-- <rng:ref name="p"/>--> <ref name="language"/> </choice> </oneOrMore> </content>
Now, this is clearly nonsense : you can't have an alternation with just one option. But did we really want to remove the possibility for having a purely documentary <langUsage> such as <p>Contains various unrecognised Polynesian languages</p>?
Can anyone remember why we made this change ? I would have expected to see something like
<choice> <oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="model.pLike"/> </oneOrMore> <oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="language"/> </oneOrMore>
myself.
-- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org <mailto: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
That idiot again! Ah well. No doubt he meant well. On 10/08/15 12:42, Hugh Cayless wrote:
Looks like it was removed by one Lou Burnard in November 2005:
commit 6e8d0575599eb72187e3613c36985e3fa407c42c Author: louburnard <louburnard@e5332ce4-a50f-0410-b94b-d658400b0204> Date: Mon Nov 7 00:02:22 2005 +0000
Removed p from content model
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://svn.code.sf.net/p/tei/code/trunk@1004 e5332ce4-a50f-0410-b94b-d658400b0204
diff --git a/P5/Source/HD/langusg.odd b/P5/Source/HD/langusg.odd index 810f61e..73d83d5 100644 --- a/P5/Source/HD/langusg.odd +++ b/P5/Source/HD/langusg.odd @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ represented within a text.</desc> <content> <rng:oneOrMore xmlns:rng="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"> <rng:choice> - <rng:ref name="p"/> +<!-- <rng:ref name="p"/>--> <rng:ref name="language"/> </rng:choice> </rng:oneOrMore>
I can’t remember what I was doing on November 2005, so I wouldn’t expect you to :-), but there must have been some reason for it...
On Aug 10, 2015, at 7:26 , Hugh Cayless <philomousos@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree it’s very odd. It appears to have been that way as long as svn has history for the spec file. See https://github.com/TEIC/Guidelines-TEST/blob/4a7d8e58ac5c3cd7d00a2af378975e1... <https://github.com/TEIC/Guidelines-TEST/blob/4a7d8e58ac5c3cd7d00a2af378975e1c1c2f21ce/P5/Source/Specs/langUsage.xml>
So it’s been busted for at least almost a decade...
On Aug 10, 2015, at 4:24 , Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@RETIRED.OX.AC.UK <mailto:lou.burnard@RETIRED.OX.AC.UK>> wrote:
The process of TEI content models proceeds apace and (as might be expected) is turning up a few oddities in some unfrequented corners.
For example, the content model of <langUsage> is currently (in the source)
<content> <oneOrMore xmlns="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0 <http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0>"> <choice> <!-- <rng:ref name="p"/>--> <ref name="language"/> </choice> </oneOrMore> </content>
Now, this is clearly nonsense : you can't have an alternation with just one option. But did we really want to remove the possibility for having a purely documentary <langUsage> such as <p>Contains various unrecognised Polynesian languages</p>?
Can anyone remember why we made this change ? I would have expected to see something like
<choice> <oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="model.pLike"/> </oneOrMore> <oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="language"/> </oneOrMore>
myself.
-- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org <mailto: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'm wondering if we had decided that with the use of private-use-area language tags (like "en-x-BattleStarGalactica") we would no longer need <p> for straightforward prose, it can go in <language>. I think it makes sense to allow <p>[1], but since no one has complained for nearly a decade, perhaps we should just leave it alone. Notes ----- [1] But Lou and I disagree on what the content model should be. I do not like ( model.pLike+ | language+ ) because I think it is reasonable to want to have both a special <language> tag or two, AND a paragraph explicating some detail of or difficulty ascertaining the language usage. Thus I prefer ( language+, model.pLike* ) or ( ( language | model.pLike )+ )
I suspect the reason for this is that <language> itself allows text content, so that's where the description belongs. However, <language> requires @ident, which must be a value according to BCP 47, so perhaps there is an argument for descriptive content in <langUsage> for cases where nothing whatsoever is known about the languages used. Cheers, Martin On 15-08-10 01:24 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
The process of TEI content models proceeds apace and (as might be expected) is turning up a few oddities in some unfrequented corners.
For example, the content model of <langUsage> is currently (in the source)
<content> <oneOrMore xmlns="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"> <choice> <!-- <rng:ref name="p"/>--> <ref name="language"/> </choice> </oneOrMore> </content>
Now, this is clearly nonsense : you can't have an alternation with just one option. But did we really want to remove the possibility for having a purely documentary <langUsage> such as <p>Contains various unrecognised Polynesian languages</p>?
Can anyone remember why we made this change ? I would have expected to see something like
<choice> <oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="model.pLike"/> </oneOrMore> <oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="language"/> </oneOrMore>
myself.
participants (4)
-
Hugh Cayless -
Lou Burnard -
Martin Holmes -
Syd Bauman