Re: Use of <q> within <rs>

I’m a long time supporter of putting <q> in <name>, <rs>, <persNam>, etc.
I tried once (see http://tei-l.970651.n3.nabble.com/quotes-in-names-tp4026585.html) but was down voted.
Maybe time’s a changing?

Best
Peter

> Am 30.10.2016 um 19:08 schrieb Robin Seguy <[email protected]>:
> 
> Hi James and list,
> 
> Examples of constructions such as:
> 
> ce roi qu'on appelait par dérision le roi de Bourges
> 
> or:
> 
> ce héros qu'Homère qualifie d'amphidexios
> 
> (Definite description/periphrasis including a more or less formal quote, which should, I believe, be encoded respectively: <rs>ce roi qu'on appelait par dérision <q>le roi de Bourges</q></rs>, and <rs>ce héros qu'Homère qualifie d'<quote>amphidexios</quote></rs>)
> 
> are all over the place.
> 
> It seems to me (especially since I deal with texts that are, so to speak, entirely made of quotations), that one of the blind spots of the TEI treatment of intertextuality is to assign it a specific level, whereas reported speech, fictional or not, can extend from entire volumes (from Robinson Crusoe to Portnoy's Complaint) to smallish units like parts of names.
> 
> 
> Robin
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 30, 2016, at 13:58, Elisa Beshero-Bondar <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Hi James-- In Scott's first example, it looked like a good case for <quote>, as in a quote from an external source as I imagine this is. So perhaps we'd want to code it thus, if it's a quote from the surveyor or something:
>> 
>>  <rs type="findspot">said to have been found <quote>5 km from centre
>>    [of <placeName>Bath</placeName>], near a quarry near a villa</quote></rs>
>> 
>> That's the use that looks odd to us because it's longer than the usual way we use <rs>. Still, it seems plausible to me for an archaeology project to have longer referring strings tied to locational specs. In this example, I'd probably want to nest the <rs> inside the <q>, or rather, in this case, I think, a <quote> element.  
>> 
>> But in Scott's second example, and in the example Lou provided, these seem to be a more typical case, and one I think I've seen before. And here, sure, if the <q> isn't explicitly pointing to an outside source, it would just be <q>:
>> 
>>  <rs type="findspot">in excavation, re-used in a fourth-century
>>    <q>chalet</q></rs>
>> 
>> If this whole string refers to the location of a findspot, it seems to make sense inside the <rs>, though I wonder if it should surround just:
>>  <rs>fourth-century <q>chalet</q></rs>. Still, we see the same problem: These uses of <q> and <quote> are neither one of them permitted inside of <rs>, and that's the issue worth discussing here. I've opened a ticket on GitHub requesting discussion--do you see any issues with nesting q or quote inside rs?
>> 
>> Elisa
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 1:42 PM, James Cummings <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Elisa (and others)
>> 
>> I think you would mean <q> there instead of <quote> with the former meaning that it is in quotation marks, the latter really means that it is a quotation ascribed to an external agency.
>> 
>> Like Lou I've always understood <rs> as a phrase more directly referencing a named entity. It is a name or identifying phrase that is not a proper noun (for which they should use <name>) like 'my lovely wife', 'her', 'the young gentleman'.
>> 
>> Since I suspect this is an EpiDoc usage perhaps someone who knows that TEI subset well can comment on what their recommended usage is.
>> 
>> James
>> 
>> --
>> Dr James Cummings, Academic IT Services, University of Oxford
>> 
>> 
>> On 30 Oct 2016 5:05 p.m., Elisa Beshero-Bondar <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Lou: I was thinking that the use of rs looked a little long here, too, but might make sense in the project. But <rs> with an @type set to "findspot" seems a lot more precise than to use an <ab> (anonymous block, or "any arbitrary component-level unit of text"). I can see how an archaeology project would want to look at referring strings of text associated with location. 
>> 
>> But even if rs is usually something of a shorter phrase, why shouldn't it contain quoted material? So, for example, what about:
>> 
>> <rs>The town <quote>formerly known as Princeton</quote></rs>?
>> 
>> We can't simultaneously indicated quotation from another source, or the presence of quotation marks (with <q>) in this. Come to think of it, one of my student project-teams ran into this problem last year in coding a series of newspaper articles with quoted dialogue. 
>> 
>> Elisa
>> 
>> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Lou Burnard <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think this is quite a strange use of <rs> : the phrases you quote are some way away from things like "the village" or "over there" or even "The town formerly known as Princeton", in that though they do refer to a location, they don't really name it. So (in the absence of a specific <findspot> element) I think I'd argue for using an <ab> here, with an appropriate type i.e. <ab type="findspot">. In which case <q> and indeed <rs> would all be unequivocally available.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  On 30/10/16 16:47, Elisa Beshero-Bondar wrote:
>> Hello, Scott--
>> I was a little surprised to find that <rs> couldn't contain either a <q> or (perhaps more precisely here) a <quote> element, but that's so. I imagine this is because <rs> is thought to be sitting below the level of the quotation marks. As defined in Chapter 3 of the Guidelines, rs (referring string) is a "a phrase which refers to some person, place, object, etc." So the question is, are your examples of <rs> holding a little too much, and should they be sitting inside the <q> elements? In your first example, maybe, but in your second example, clearly not--we'd be losing referential information about your findspot if we wrapped only chalet in the rs. 
>> 
>> This is perhaps a good opportunity for a ticket to permit <q> and <quote> inside <rs>. What do others think? I'm happy to take this to my colleagues on Council.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Elisa
>> 
>> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Scott Vanderbilt (TEI-L) <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Is there any particular reason why <q> is not permitted within <rs>?
>> 
>> I am attempting to mark-up archaeological findspots that occasionally quote from another text, e.g.:
>> 
>>    <rs type="findspot">said to have been found <q>5 km from centre
>>    [of <placeName>Bath</placeName>], near a quarry near a villa</q></rs>
>> 
>> and
>> 
>>    <rs type="findspot">in excavation, re-used in a fourth-century
>>    <q>chalet</q></rs>
>> 
>> However, <rs> does not permit such usage of <q> (or <quote> for that matter), notwithstanding its being defined as "a _general purpose_ name or referring string".
>> 
>> Is there some other sanctioned method of accomplishing my goal of distinguishing the quoted text from the passages within which they appear?
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD
>> Director, Center for the Digital Text | Associate Professor of English
>> University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg | Humanities Division
>> 150 Finoli Drive
>> Greensburg, PA  15601  USA
>> E-mail: [email protected]
>> Development site: http://newtfire.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD
>> Director, Center for the Digital Text | Associate Professor of English
>> University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg | Humanities Division
>> 150 Finoli Drive
>> Greensburg, PA  15601  USA
>> E-mail: [email protected]
>> Development site: http://newtfire.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD
>> Director, Center for the Digital Text | Associate Professor of English
>> University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg | Humanities Division
>> 150 Finoli Drive
>> Greensburg, PA  15601  USA
>> E-mail: [email protected]
>> Development site: http://newtfire.org