Re: Use of <q> within <rs>

Not perhaps a very convincing example since a quick internet search shows that nobody puts quotes round the last word of the expanded form of TAFKAP (certainly not the artist himself)

Sent from my Honor Mobile

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Use of within
From: Martin Holmes
To: [email protected]
CC:

In this phrase:

<rs>The artist formerly known as <q>Prince</q></rs>

it seems absolutely obvious to me that this is a referring string (it
was Prince's adopted method of referring to himself, and widely used).
It also seems fairly uncontroversial to me that the word "Prince" in
that string is

"material which is distinguished from the surrounding text using
quotation marks or a similar method, for any one of a variety of reasons
including, but not limited to: direct speech or thought, technical terms
or jargon, authorial distance, quotations from elsewhere, and passages
that are mentioned but not used"

and therefore that <q> is perfectly reasonable.

It might not be easy to massage the content model to make that happen,
so we might be tempted to wriggle out of it by suggesting <soCalled> and
other possibilities; but I think that's a distraction.

Cheers,
Martin

On 2016-10-30 04:08 PM, Robin Seguy wrote:
> I can see how, in the first case, <soCalled> makes sense — but isn't it in
> many cases just a way to avoid giving a definite answer to the question of
> the source of the quotation? (presumably the pro-Burgundian party was more
> prone to use a derisive epithet); in cases where a source is ascertained,
> like the second one, I can't see what necessarily makes it a metalinguistic
> statement. The epithet may be a misguiding case, but, in contrast, with
> greater syntactic integration:
>
> "[...] la loi d'universelle finalité posée par Celui, dont Dante écrit, en
> conclusion de son poème, que, par les sollicitations de son amour, il
> attire à Lui le soleil, moteur de notre globe, et les autres étoiles jetées
> par Lui dans l'espace."
>
> "[...] the law of universal finality laid down by Him of Whom Dante writes
> at the conclusion of his poem :
> But yet the will rolled onward, like a wheel In even motion, by Love
> impelled, That moves the sun in heaven and all the stars."
>
> Deciding that it is not a bona fides quotation seems to me to distort the
> notion of quotation itself.
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Lou Burnard <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Would <soCalled> or <mentioned> not be more suitable for these examples?
>>
>>
>> On 30/10/16 18:08, Robin Seguy wrote:
>>
>> 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]
>> <[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] <[email protected]>
>>> Development site: http://newtfire.org
>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewtfire.org%2F&data=01%7C01%7Cebb8%40PITT.EDU%7C0bc162d32e3d49bfe22e08d400ec795d%7C9ef9f489e0a04eeb87cc3a526112fd0d%7C1&sdata=b3EWL3Vc26d%2BAvLvHFz4e3uCF5hIjKsKZ9cKjtzfWcs%3D&reserved=0>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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] <[email protected]>
>>> Development site: http://newtfire.org
>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewtfire.org%2F&data=01%7C01%7Cebb8%40PITT.EDU%7C0bc162d32e3d49bfe22e08d400ec795d%7C9ef9f489e0a04eeb87cc3a526112fd0d%7C1&sdata=b3EWL3Vc26d%2BAvLvHFz4e3uCF5hIjKsKZ9cKjtzfWcs%3D&reserved=0>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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] <[email protected]>
>> Development site: http://newtfire.org
>>
>>
>>
>