Re: @xml:base with @rendition (and maybe other pointers)
Martin Holmes <[email protected]> Wed, 3 May 2017 05:34:43 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.tei.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2017-05-03 05:26 AM, John P. McCaskey wrote: > Another reason to design for internal renditions only: > > Renditions are supposed to indicate how a source document is formatted, > not how a TEI document should be presented. Absolutely. > Someone will say, =E2=80=9CI want an external renditions file so I can = easily > change the formatting of, say, <head> elements on all my TEI files.=E2=80= =9C But > that is to misuse <rendition>. Renditions are supposed to be > document-specific. There is an argument that external renditions should > be positively disallowed. I often use the rendition descriptions in a document to try to render a=20 digital edition as similarly as possible to the original; this is surely=20 not abusive. But there is also the case of born-digital documents such=20 as modern journal articles. Would you want to ban the use of <rendition>=20 and @rendition for such documents on the basis that there's no original=20 source that's being described? I don't necessarily disagree with this; there's a reasonable argument=20 that says in a digitally-authored document, you can simply tag correctly=20 (i.e. identify what everything _is_), and then the rendering should=20 apply the appropriate formatting based on the journal's house style. But=20 one can imagine all sorts of exceptions (such as quotations from primary=20 sources inside the article). Cheers, Martin > Corpus-wide formatting changes should be done with stylesheets, not > external rendition pointers. > > -- > > > On 5/3/2017 8:08 AM, John P. McCaskey wrote: >> >> I started this because of a multi-purpose stylesheet I have. >> >> I think I=E2=80=99ll keep the bug and promote it as a feature: >> >> =E2=80=9CExternal renditions are not supported; renditions ignore xml:= base. So >> go ahead and encode with local file names throughout your document. >> Later when you deploy, use xml:base to set a root directory for those >> files and your renditions won=E2=80=99t get messed up.=E2=80=9D >> >> -- John >> >> >> On 5/2/2017 5:39 PM, Hugh Cayless wrote: >>> >>> On May 2, 2017, at 17:07, Syd Bauman <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hugh -- >>>> >>>> Where does it say the interpretation of a fragment ID *with respect >>>> to its @xml:base* depends on the media type? >>> >>> I don't believe it does. I was looking at things >>> like https://www.w3.org/TR/fragid-best-practices/, which says that >>> the behaviors with regard to fragment references depend on the media >>> type. To be sure, I'm not certain we'd actually be free to define a >>> custom behavior for fragment ids because we have to follow the >>> behaviors defined for XML. They're thinking particularly of cases >>> where you might not have the whole file. >>> >>> I can't see how we could insist #word-type URIs would result in the >>> retrieval of a different document. As Michael says, the assumption is >>> that you've already got the referenced document, even if the base >>> points to a different one. >>>> >>>> John -- >>>> >>>> Yes, I think a base URI is specific to an element (which might be th= e >>>> whole document, might not). >>>> >>>> Yes, I think the quoted passage is saying that a fragment ID points >>>> to the same document as the base URI in effect. >>>> >>>> No, I'm not at all sure the paragraph in the xml:base spec does say >>>> that fragment IDs should honor the xml:base. But then again, I'm not >>>> at all sure it *doesn't* say that. >>> >>> I can't read RFC >>>> >>>>> In XML, isn=E2=80=99t =E2=80=9Cbase URI=E2=80=9C something specific= to an element, not to >>>>> the document? >>>>> >>>>> If so, the passage quoted is not saying that fragment IDs can point >>>>> only to the document they are in, just that a fragment ID points to >>>>> the same document as the base URI in effect for the containing XML >>>>> element. >>>>> >>>>> Doesn=E2=80=99t this paragraph <https://www.w3.org/TR/xmlbase/#matc= hing> >>>>> say fragment IDs should honor the complete xml:base value in effect >>>>> for the attribute=E2=80=99s element? >> >