Ps-discussion
Revision as of 00:35, 26 February 2009 by Joachim Veit (talk | contribs) (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 ...)
Some points to discuss:
- One of the proposals was to use
<div type="ps">because<ps>allows no<p>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
<div type="ps">would force an uncomfortable view of the textual status of the letter. Since a<div>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<p>tag, or a salutation formula, with its<salute>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<div>element would be used for something other than a real subdivision.“
- "For example, straightforward as it may seem, encoding a postscript as
