[osis-core] Last Schema from Spain! - <seg>

[Patrick Durusau]

Chris,

Good argument for seg (documentary hypothesis, would not need all the 
scholarly apparatus for such a task)!

Chris Little wrote:

> Patrick,
>
> Ah, yes, I see now that it was just commented out.
>
> I was using seg to mark emphasized text since we lack emph.  For that 
> purpose, it could be used just about anywhere that we can put CDATA. 
> But perhaps a real emph element would be preferrable to using seg 
> since seg hampers interchange.  Alternately, we could provide some 
> standard seg types.

Just curious about the need for emph. Most text is emphasized because it 
is different, foreign words in text, names that are special (geographic 
for example), first time used (usually means a definition is near), etc. 
Most of the cases I can think of are ones that we have elements that 
would represent "why" the word is emphasized. Or is this a case where 
all we know is that the word was emphasized (legacy text for example) 
and don't know why?

Thanks for the suggestions on the content models!

I am leaving fairly early in the morning to take Elizabeth to bassoon 
camp so will be out most of the day. May have a new version of the 
schema out in the morning, but more likely tomorrow afternoon.

Any comments on dropping key/keyRef? Was a good idea but too costly 
(IMHO) to justify the aggravation at this level of encoding. May be an 
issue we want to revisit in the future or if it gets fixed in XML 
Schema. (the latter being very unlikely)

Patrick


>
> I was also considering using it to mark the authorship of a pentateuch 
> according to the documentary hypothesis, which would require that it 
> have next/prev so that it can cross hierarchy boundaries.
>
> --Chris
>
> Patrick Durusau wrote:
>
>> Chris,
>>
>> Well, seg is still present but commented out. Todd had asked about 
>> how to use seg and it does pose some problems for unconstricted use 
>> (should it be in div, p, verse, etc.) and I was thinking (see the 
>> comments in test8, that if I had to caution about its use, do we 
>> really need to have it?
>>
>> Basic issue is how to instruct people on its use. Steve and I talked 
>> about it today and I agree that you would not need to go very far 
>> beyond where we stop with OSIS 1.1 to need seg but do we need seg 
>> here as well?
>>
>> Sorry if I did not make more of an issue about it when I posted test8.
>>
>> Comments? ("Let the encoder beware!" sort of position? If you want 
>> seg, please specify how it should (as opposed to how I put it in) be 
>> in the schema.)
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Patrick
>

-- 
Patrick Durusau
Director of Research and Development
Society of Biblical Literature
pdurusau@emory.edu