Re: div and p
Paul Schaffner <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.tei.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <1484247947.1247700.845858296.0B07ADAE@webmail.messagingengine.com> |
How common? At a guess? Maybe between 1 and 3% have
some sort of div,p problem.
Typographic signals? Frequently none, depends on the
nature of the book and of the div.
Strategies? I should add a fifth one: demoting the
subordinate divs to something less than divs, e.g.
numbered or labeled paragraphs, or list items. And
a sixth: breaking the superordinate div into three
divs, "stuff before the analytical bit," "the
analytical bit," and "stuff after the analytical bit."
Examples? They're hard to search for, once successfully
subsumed by one or more of my four (now six) strategies.
The commonest fall into a few categories. E.g.:
In both argumentative / polemical / hortatory
and narrative books, chapters are often subdivided,
but the last subdivision often strays off-topic,
or moves almost invisibly into a general conclusion,
without the latter being typographically marked.
<div><head>The problems with regicide</head>
<div><head>1. It's illegal</head>
<p/>
<p/>
<p/>
</div>
<div><head>2. It's unscriptural</head>
<p/>
<p/>
</div>
<div<head>3. It's imprudent</head>
<p/>
<p/>
<p/>
--> [</div>] <-----
<p>All in all, regicide is a bad idea, in fact
it's one of the worst ideas. I had a dream the
other night about bad ideas, let me tell you:
self-driving cars. flavored water. uncomforable
seats. There are a lot of bad ideas around.
But regicide is the worst.</p>
</div>
This final bit can also turn into a prayer, or
a peroration, or an apology, or something that
has no obvious category -- except that it does
not belong to the last subdiv in the chapter.
A second variety is typical of documentary anthologies,
e.g. "The letter of Col. Smith from Ireland, together
with the King's proclamation and Parliament's reply"
In one or more of these announced documents, or between
them, or after the last one, the editor might well
suddenly start talking, narrating, or opining, without
much of a clear break from the document. Most of
these, but not all, are dealt with by my 'raisins
in oatmeal' floating text strategy, albeit often with
the dish composed of 90% raisins and only 5% devoted to
the oatmeal matrix.
<div type="collection">
<div type="letter">...</div>
<div type="proclamation">...</div>
<div type="reply">...</div>
<p>And after this the matter was far from settled...</p>
</div>
A third variety might be called the central-focused
div, in which the first few paragraphs introduce
an issue, followed by a headed subdiv, often formatted
differently, that addresses it in detail, before
yielding again to an undivved set of paragraphs.
<div><head>Baptists and Presbyterians</head>
<p>Let me tell you about B and P.</p>
<p>They may pretend to be different but they're both
the devil's spawn.</p>
<p>In fact, as soon as you compare their doctrines,
they turn out to be virtually indistinguishable.</p>
<div type="comparison">
<head>P and B Compared</head>
<div type="doctrine">
<head>Salvation</head>
<div>
<head>The P doctrine</head>
</div>
<div>
<head>The B doctrine</head>
</div>
</div>
<div type="doctrine">
<head>Sacrament</head>
<div>
<head>The P doctrine</head>
</div>
<div>
<head>The B doctrine</head>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p>So you see, they're not so different after all,
and once you compare them both to True Catholic
Doctrine, both are clearly faces of the same Heresy.</p>
<p>So I suggest burning them all, don't you agree?</p>
</div>
Here's an actual example of the first type, more or
less (apologies for the upper-cased SGML element names...):
Source: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A26917.0001.001?view=toc
<DIV1>
<HEAD>XX. DIRECTIONS FOR CONFIRMATION In a state of Grace.</HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="direction">
<HEAD>DIRECT. I. Be sure that the Foundation be well laid, both in your
Heads and Hearts; or else you can ne|ver attain to Confirmation, nor be
savingly built up.</HEAD>
<P>TO this end you must know <HI>what the Foundation is, and how it must
be soundly laid</HI>. The <HI>Foundation ...</P>
<P>...</P>
</DIV2>
* * *
<DIV2 N="20" TYPE="direction">
<HEAD>DIRECT. XX. Live as with Death continually in your eye, and spend
every day in serious preparation for it, that when it cometh, you may
find your work dispatcht; and may not then cry out in vain to God to try
you once again.</HEAD>
<P>PRomise not your selves long life: Think not of death as at many
years distance, but as hard at hand. Think what will then be need|ful to
your peace and comfort, and order all your life accordingly, and prepare
...</P>
</DIV2>
<P>And now I have given you all these <HI>Directi|ons</HI>, I shall only
request you in the close, that you will set your very hearts to the
daily serious pra|ctise of them; For there is no other way for a ripe
confirmed state of Grace: And as ever you regard the glory of God, the
honour of your Religion, the welfare of the Church and those about you,
and the <HI>living</HI> and <HI>dying</HI> comforts of your selves; O do
not sluggishly rest in an In|fant state of Grace! Did you but know how a
<HI>weak</HI> and <HI>strong</HI> Faith differ, and how a <HI>weak</HI>
and a found <HI>Confirmed Christian</HI> differ, as to the ho|nour of
God, and the good of others, and especi|ally to themselves, both in
<HI>life</HI> and <HI>death</HI>, it would quickly awaken you to a
cheerful diligence, for so high and excellent an end. Did you but well
understand the wrong that Christ and the Gos|pel have sustained in the
World, yea in <HI>England</HI>, by <HI>weak, diseased, distempered</HI>
Christians, your hearts would bleed, and with shame and grief, it would
be your secret and open lamentation. Stir up then the Grace that is
given you, and use Christs means, and do your best, and you will find
that Christ is not an insufficient Physician, nor an uneffectual
Saviour, or an empty Foun|tain; but that he is filled with all the
fulness of God, and hath Spirit and life to communicate to his Members,
<HI>Zech.</HI> 12.8. and that there is no want which he cannot supply,
and no corruption or temptation, which his Grace is not sufficient to
overcome, <HI>John</HI> 4.14. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12.9. <HI>Rom.</HI> 6.4,
6. <HI>Col.</HI> 3.1, 3, 4.</P>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
pfs
ps This is not intended as an argument for p,div = div,p equality of
treatment,
nor against it for that matter.
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017, at 12:18, Marjorie Burghart wrote:
> Hello!
>
> How common: off the top of my head, I would say that it is the norm (and
> not an oddity) at least for historical essays (for what I know - it might
> be quite common in other genres). This is part of the "art of writing" I
> have been taught as a French historian: at the end of a chapter, you must
> offer a short abstract of the topics and conclusions of the current
> chapter, and offer a "transition" from those topics to topic of the next
> chapter. My PhD certainly follows this rule, as did my supervisor's
> dissertation. The typographic conventions may vary: a bit more space
> before the conclusive paragraph, a separation sign (in my PhD I chose to
> have asterisks in the shape of a triangle, I don't know if this sign has
> a name?), or sometimes nothing particular.
>
> @James: of course I could find workarounds, but what I find irksome is
> that I have to...
>
> @Martin: I don't suggest to change the jTEI format, I'm currently using
> it to write book chapters, which may explain why I'm running into this
> issue. The jTEI rules are not the source of the problem, they just make
> it more evident.
>
>
>
> ----- Mail original -----
> De: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <[email protected]>
> À: [email protected]
> Envoyé: Jeudi 12 Janvier 2017 16:33:00
> Objet: Re: div and p
>
> > On Jan 12, 2017, at 7:28 AM, Paul Schaffner <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Just to confirm that in encoding tens of thousands of books, and
> > instructing editors, the p,div vs. div,p issue in TEI has been a source
> > of frequent frustration. Far from being rare, actual examples of
> > div,p are quite common in the wild.
>
> Since we didn’t examine every book printed on Western presses
> since 1470, it would not be surprising if there were counter-examples
> we had missed. Since however we did look, I’m a little surprised
> to hear you say counter-examples are not just existent but “quite
> common”.
>
> Can you point to any examples? Can you give frequency numbers?
> Of a thousand books, do 400 have material that should go in
> paragraph-level chunks after sub-divisions? What does “quite
> common” mean, quantitatively?
>
> And … what are the typographic signals that indicate that the
> paragraphs in question are part of the higher-level division but
> not part of the immediately preceding subdivision, and not part
> of a new subdivision of its own?
>
>
> ********************************************
> C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
> Black Mesa Technologies LLC
> [email protected]
> http://www.blackmesatech.com
> ********************************************
--
Paul Schaffner Digital Library Production Service
[email protected] | http://www.umich.edu/~pfs/