Ps-discussion - Revision history

Piotr Banski: Reverted edits by BobbieThompson (Talk); changed back to last version by Piotr Banski

2011-03-04T18:43:51Z

Reverted edits by BobbieThompson (Talk); changed back to last version by Piotr Banski

BobbieThompson at 17:10, 4 March 2011

2011-03-04T17:10:31Z

Piotr Banski: + category

2009-02-26T23:34:58Z

+ category

Joachim Veit: /* Some points to discuss: */

2009-02-26T08:53:51Z

‎Some points to discuss:

Joachim Veit: New page: == Some points to discuss: == * One of the proposals was to use `<div type="ps">` because `<ps>` allows no `<p>` inside. : We found the ...

2009-02-25T22:35:45Z

New page: == Some points to discuss: == * One of the proposals was to use <code><div type="ps"></code> because <code><ps></code> allows no <code><p></code> inside. : We found the ...

New page

== Some points to discuss: ==

* One of the proposals was to use <code><div type="ps"></code> because <code><ps></code> allows no <code><p></code> inside.
: We found the following notice in Edward Vanhoutte's and Ron Van den Branden's 2004 Toronto contribution ''Describing, Transcribing, Encoding, and Editing Modern Correspondence Material: A Textbase Approach'', in: ''Computing the Edition'' 23/4 (forthcoming):

:: "For example, straightforward as it may seem, encoding a postscript as <code><div type="ps"></code> would force an uncomfortable view of the textual status of the letter. Since a <code><div></code> element, as the TEI Guidelines document, is meant to indicate a subdivision of a text, this would not fit a postscript very well. There is no reason to consider a postscript more a subdivision than a paragraph, with its own <code><p></code> tag, or a salutation formula, with its <code><salute></code> tag. Even is such an ontological-theoretical objection would be accepted in a model for letter encoding, it still leaves the markup-theoretical fact that in this case, a TEI <code><div></code> element would be used for something other than a real subdivision.“

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:43, 4 March 2011
Line 5:		Line 5:
	: We found the following notice in Edward Vanhoutte's and Ron Van den Branden's 2004 Toronto contribution ''Describing, Transcribing, Encoding, and Editing Modern Correspondence Material: A Textbase Approach'', in: ''Computing the Edition'' 23/4 (forthcoming):		: We found the following notice in Edward Vanhoutte's and Ron Van den Branden's 2004 Toronto contribution ''Describing, Transcribing, Encoding, and Editing Modern Correspondence Material: A Textbase Approach'', in: ''Computing the Edition'' 23/4 (forthcoming):

−	:: "For example, straightforward as it may seem, encoding a postscript as <code><div type="ps"></code> would force an uncomfortable view of the textual status of the letter. Since a <code><div></code> element, as the TEI Guidelines document, is meant to indicate a subdivision of a text, this would not fit a postscript very well. There is no reason to consider a postscript more a subdivision than a paragraph, with its own <code><p></code> tag, or a salutation formula, with its <code><salute></code> tag. Even is such an ontological-theoretical objection would be accepted in a model ~~[http://www.superiorpapers.com/term_paper.php term papers]~~ for letter encoding, it still leaves the markup-theoretical fact that in this case, a TEI <code><div></code> element would be used for something other than a real subdivision.“	+	:: "For example, straightforward as it may seem, encoding a postscript as <code><div type="ps"></code> would force an uncomfortable view of the textual status of the letter. Since a <code><div></code> element, as the TEI Guidelines document, is meant to indicate a subdivision of a text, this would not fit a postscript very well. There is no reason to consider a postscript more a subdivision than a paragraph, with its own <code><p></code> tag, or a salutation formula, with its <code><salute></code> tag. Even is such an ontological-theoretical objection would be accepted in a model for letter encoding, it still leaves the markup-theoretical fact that in this case, a TEI <code><div></code> element would be used for something other than a real subdivision.“

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:10, 4 March 2011
Line 5:		Line 5:
	: We found the following notice in Edward Vanhoutte's and Ron Van den Branden's 2004 Toronto contribution ''Describing, Transcribing, Encoding, and Editing Modern Correspondence Material: A Textbase Approach'', in: ''Computing the Edition'' 23/4 (forthcoming):		: We found the following notice in Edward Vanhoutte's and Ron Van den Branden's 2004 Toronto contribution ''Describing, Transcribing, Encoding, and Editing Modern Correspondence Material: A Textbase Approach'', in: ''Computing the Edition'' 23/4 (forthcoming):

−	:: "For example, straightforward as it may seem, encoding a postscript as <code><div type="ps"></code> would force an uncomfortable view of the textual status of the letter. Since a <code><div></code> element, as the TEI Guidelines document, is meant to indicate a subdivision of a text, this would not fit a postscript very well. There is no reason to consider a postscript more a subdivision than a paragraph, with its own <code><p></code> tag, or a salutation formula, with its <code><salute></code> tag. Even is such an ontological-theoretical objection would be accepted in a model for letter encoding, it still leaves the markup-theoretical fact that in this case, a TEI <code><div></code> element would be used for something other than a real subdivision.“	+	:: "For example, straightforward as it may seem, encoding a postscript as <code><div type="ps"></code> would force an uncomfortable view of the textual status of the letter. Since a <code><div></code> element, as the TEI Guidelines document, is meant to indicate a subdivision of a text, this would not fit a postscript very well. There is no reason to consider a postscript more a subdivision than a paragraph, with its own <code><p></code> tag, or a salutation formula, with its <code><salute></code> tag. Even is such an ontological-theoretical objection would be accepted in a model [http://www.superiorpapers.com/term_paper.php term papers] for letter encoding, it still leaves the markup-theoretical fact that in this case, a TEI <code><div></code> element would be used for something other than a real subdivision.“

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:34, 26 February 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	[[Category:Postscript encoding]]
	== Some points to discuss: ==		== Some points to discuss: ==