Re: seg and interp

Thanks everyone for the feedback!  Very helpful indeed.  I really
appreciate it.  I looked a bit at what was suggested and I have a few more
remarks/further questions:

Thanks for clarifying how to get around "breaking" the xml rules by having
<seg> go across elements.  I'll use @next and @prev to get around that.

Understood about the problem with using <interp> in the way were doing it.


 It seems like Roberto is right and that using @ana with <seg> that points
to <interp>s in an <interpGrp> or the like would be appropriate, and that
perhaps <taxonomy> isn't exactly the right element for doing this.

Questions:

Is it necessary to index the <seg>s?  I understand the need to do so in
order to use @next and @prev, but what are the other reasons for doing so?
What is the benefit of including an xml:id?

I'm wondering what is the problem with keeping it more simple by using
something like <seg> with @type instead of getting into @ana with
<interp>.  For instance, as was proposed with the first email:

<seg function="modul" type="pastLifeWho">if you wonder whether the brahmin
boy
                        Bhadraśuddha was then at that time someone else, or
you are of two minds
                        about it, or doubtful, do not see him so. Why?
Because the bodhisattva
                        mahāsattva Maitreya himself was then at that time
the brahmin boy
                        Bhadraśuddha</seg>

 In terms of keeping the markup consistent without using @ana and an
<interpGrp>, I was considering limiting the @type values with the schema.
Perhaps it's better to create the <interpGrp> and use @ana to point to it
and keep all those interpretations in the document, but since we will be
doing many texts I'd prefer not to keep that list in every text in case we
need to make changes to the list (which I suppose would then involve going
through and changing it every time).  Perhaps all the <interp>s could be
kept in a separate document that all the <seg>s would point to instead of
listing them all in every document.

I guess my main question is: what are the main benefits of doing something
more complex like using @ana with <interp> rather than doing it more simple
with just @type?

Mike

On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Roberto Rosselli Del Turco <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear Piotr,
> I've been tempted to use <taxonomy> for a very similar purpose, but
> wouldn't that be a sort of "tag abuse"? Since from what I understand
> reading the relative section in the Guidelines this element should be used
> for *bibliographical* taxonomies only, it is not a general purpose
> classification tool.
>
> I would then suggest to use @ana with <seg>, as you do too, pointing to a
> number of <interp>s in an <interpGrp>.
>
> All best,
>
> R
>
>
> Il 28.04.2017 21:24 Piotr Bański ha scritto:
>
>> Dear Mike,
>>
>> It looks like your system assumes a rich taxonomy of objects the
>> textual cues to which you choose to identify in your corpus. I would
>> suggest that you first explore the possibilities that <taxonomy> gives
>> you, as it will free you of the need to parse your attributes later
>> on, but it will also force you (or help you) to keep your (so far
>> merely implied) taxonomy consistent throughout.
>>
>> http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-taxonomy.html
>>
>> Below is a fragment that uses <seg> alone -- which you may like,
>> because it's simpler for the encoders.
>>
>> Remarks:
>> 1. the markup below presupposes several hierarchically organised
>> <taxonomy> elements in the header.
>> 2. I am not sure what you use @function for, so I just keep it as-is
>> 3. It is a good idea to index at least the added <seg> elements. The
>> indices I added to them have nearly random content.
>> 4. You don't need @prev on the last one, but it may be useful. It's up
>> to you and your tools. I assumed a rule whereby if there is no @ana
>> attribute, it means that the <seg> is a continuation, and @prev points
>> to the previous one in the chain. But YMMV.
>> 5. Sorry about the line breaks, you may want to paste this fragment
>> into your test TEI document and reformat.
>>
>> Hope this helps,
>>
>>   Piotr
>>
>> <body>
>>          <div>
>>             <p>In the <seg xml:id="d-p3-s3" ana="#place.main">Country
>> of the Bhargas, on Mount
>>                   Śuśumāra in a fearsome forest of wild animals</seg>
>> with a <seg xml:id="d-p3-s4"
>>                   ana="#audience.Gen">great saṅgha of about 500 monks,
>> eminent śrāvaka-elders who
>>                   possessed clairvoyance</seg>.</p>
>>          </div>
>>          <div>
>>             <p><seg xml:id="d-p-s43" function="modul"
>> ana="#past.life.Who">if you wonder whether the
>>                   brahmin boy Bhadraśuddha was then at that time
>> someone else, or you are of two
>>                   minds about it, or doubtful, do not see him so. Why?
>> Because the bodhisattva
>>                   mahāsattva Maitreya himself was then at that time
>> the brahmin boy
>>                   Bhadraśuddha</seg></p>
>>             <p>
>>                <seg xml:id="d-p-s44" function="modul"
>> type="#qualities.Buddha" next="#d-p-s45">The
>>                   Tathāgata was handsome and charismatic, controlled
>> in his faculties and in his
>>                   mind. He had attained excellence in control and calm
>> abiding, and superiority in
>>                   control and calm abiding. He guarded his faculties,
>> elephant-like in control of
>>                   his passions, and was radiant, unsullied, and clear
>> like a lake.</seg></p>
>>
>>             <p><seg xml:id="d-p-s45" function="modul"
>> prev="#d-p-s44">His body was adorned with the
>>                   thirty-two marks of a great being, and with the
>> eighty minor marks, like the
>>                   blossoming flower of a royal sal tree, and towering
>> like Mount Meru, the king of
>>                   mountains. His face was as calm as the sphere of the
>> moon, and radiantly clear and
>>                   brilliant like the sphere of the sun. His body was
>> proportioned like a nyagrodha
>>                   tree, blazing with light and great splendor.</seg></p>
>>          </div>
>>       </body>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 28/04/17 09:41, Mike Engle wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> I'm involved in a project in which we're marking up a large body of
>>> literature and we want to mark various passages in the texts as
>>> significant, in essence labeling them as "this" or "that".  We took a
>>> look through the TEI Guidelines and decided to use <seg> and <interp> to
>>> mark the various passages with different attributes to specifiy what
>>> type of passage it is.
>>>
>>> For example, with <interp>:
>>>
>>> In the <interptype="placeMain">Country of the Bhargas, on Mount Śuśumāra
>>> in a fearsome forest of wild animals</interp> with a <interp
>>> type="audienceGen">great saṅgha of about 500 monks, eminent
>>> śrāvaka-elders who possessed clairvoyance</interp>.
>>>
>>>
>>> And with <seg>:
>>>
>>> <segfunction="modul"type="pastLifeWho">if you wonder whether the
>>> brahmin boy
>>>                         Bhadraśuddha was then at that time someone else,
>>> or you are of two minds
>>>                         about it, or doubtful, do not see him so. Why?
>>> Because the bodhisattva
>>>                         mahāsattva Maitreya himself was then at that
>>> time the brahmin boy
>>>                         Bhadraśuddha</seg>
>>>
>>>
>>> Two questions:
>>>
>>> 1)  Since this is going to be a very long term and labor extensive
>>> project, I wanted to check and see if the community in general felt this
>>> was a reasonable way to mark these passages and also if there are any
>>> suggestions for other ways to do this which might work better.  Can
>>> anyone suggest any other elements that might be useful for this kind of
>>> thing?
>>>
>>> 2)  We have a problem of going across elements (breaking the nesting so
>>> to speak).  For instance, a passage might start in the middle of one
>>> paragraph and finish halfway through another paragraph, and when we mark
>>> it the tag begins in one paragraph and closes in the next.  The schema
>>> doesn't like this one bit, and I'm wondering what is the best way to
>>> handle this.  For example:
>>>
>>>
>>> <p><seg function="modul" type="qualitiesBuddha">The Tathāgata was
>>> handsome and charismatic,
>>>                         controlled in his faculties and in his mind. He
>>> had attained excellence in
>>>                         control and calm abiding, and superiority in
>>> control and calm abiding. He
>>>                         guarded his faculties, elephant-like in control
>>> of his passions, and
>>>                         was radiant, unsullied, and clear like a
>>> lake.</p>
>>>
>>> <p>His body was adorned with the
>>>                         thirty-two marks of a great being, and with the
>>> eighty minor marks, like the
>>>                         blossoming flower of a royal sal tree, and
>>> towering like Mount Meru, the
>>>                         king of mountains. His face was as calm as the
>>> sphere of the moon, and
>>>                         radiantly clear and brilliant like the sphere of
>>>                         the sun. His body was proportioned like a
>>> nyagrodha tree, blazing with light
>>>                         and great splendor.</seg></p>
>>>
>>>
>>> Any help is greatly appreciate.  Forgive the formatting
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>