Posted on November 1, 2009 by Lou Burnard

When a new Ubuntu release comes out,I tend to just push the button and install it as an upgrade. Almost every time this nearly works, and therefore almost every time I find myself fiddling around for longer than strictly necessary. This is an aide memoire for next time, when the lecherous Leech (or whatever it’s called) is upon us in April…

  1. Upgraded Benson (my domestic desktop, don’t ask) overnight. Everything just worked. (Well, nearly everything. I had to fight with skype quite a lot on Saturday morning before I realised that I had two different sound inputs when the webcam was plugged in, and Skype was choosing the wrong one, but that was my fault not its)

  2. Thus encouraged, I decided also to upgrade Thimk (my laptop, the one I use everywhere, the one I am about to depend on for two weeks travelling). Not a good idea. It all seemed to work, except that …

    • The audio disappeared, completely. Even the little wotsit called “Sound” under System-Preferences disappeared. When I launched Digikam, which is a KDE application I use for managing photos, it protested that something called Morphon was unhappy…. Actually several things were unhappy, not least me.

    • Something, presumably Gnome, kept trying to do something crucial in the background, presumably trying to recover from this unhappy situation, which meant that there weren’t any CPU cycles left for me to do things like scroll windows. Which made most things other than emacs unusable. OK, I do most things with emacs anyway, but still…

    • In such circumstances, one does two things: reboot several times; and spend ages trawling the interweb for plaintive messages from fellow sufferers, in the hope that one of them will have found or been given an answer. The latter course (as usual) showed me that I was not alone – but that no-one had a sure-fire solution. A significant number of people opined that pulseAudio was a disaster area… but there it was working quite happily on my desktop, and removing it certainly didn’t solve my laptop’s problem.

    • The rebooting showed up a much more alarming problem: approximately half of the time, the laptop would hang in the middle of the boot sequence (immediately after loading the drivers for the stupid 3G modem I never use, since you ask). And half the time it would complete the boot sequence and then hit the problems outlined above.

  3. What does the superior man do when confronted by such problems? He moves on, or to be more exact, he moves back. Thanks to the wonders of the oucs-ubuntu stick I can reinstall a nice fresh Jaunty Jackalope Just Like That. This will mean reinstalling all the software packages I’ve added since June or whenever, not to mention taking steps to recover from having my home directory zapped but still.

  4. It’s Sunday, so I am going to be pottering about in the kitchen baking, not to mention the ironing. So it’s no big deal to connect the big USB disk to the laptop, boot the latter from the oucs-ubuntu stick, and do a not-so-quick rsync of my home directory to the former. Here’s the command line I chose eventually:

    sudo rsync -vrlPeogt –exclude=Public /media/disk-1/home/lou /media/disk/thinkBack2

    The –exclude is to exclude stuff which is available from various SVN servers; I also had the sense to delete the .trash directory before starting the backup.

  5. Then it’s just a matter of …

    • telling the oucs-ubuntu stick to install itself de novo on the laptop
    • restoring everything from the USB backup
    • reinstalling any packages I’d forgotten I was using
    • repopulating my Public directory from the sourceforge and OUCS repositories

It’s getting on for 9 pm, and the restore is still chugging away: I fear I will have to get on with the ironing after all.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m still a Ubuntu fanboy… I think.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 1 Comment

An interesting day at La Villette

Posted on October 10, 2009 by Lou Burnard

The view of the Geode from the CiteOn Thursday evening about 8 pm I succeeded (not without some effort) in persuading the rather tentative (but free) wifi of the Hotel Crimée to let me receive my email at the start of this week’s brief expedition to Paris. This was a good thing because it enabled me to receive a long awaited official document (“La convention d’accueil”) from the CNRS which being signed half of my time will officially been at the disposition of the TGE ADONIS, an idea which Yannick Maignien and I first discussed at the Fréjus summer school, almost exactly a year ago. “Ah, l’administration française”, as they say with almost exactly the same air of proud resignation as we might say “well that’s british bureaucracy”.

Anyway, it meant that I seriously toyed for a while with the idea of adding the TGE ADONIS logo to the slides for my talk (along with those of the TEI and Oxford Uni, naturally) before reluctantly getting down to the rather more serious task of boiling down 60 slides of rambling inconsequentiality to a finely honed 30 minute presentation about how the semantic web was going to transform digital humanities. Or something. Even after a couple of hours work and a light dinner from the Japanese restaurant across the street this was still more hacked than honed so I went to bed.

Next morning, bright and early and breakfasted a la parisienne, I set off for the Cité des Sciences et de l’Industrie, a monster science museum about 15 minutes walk away. For those who have never seen it before (e.g. me) this was quite an impressive experience. I’m seeing a pattern emerge though — you have La Defense, you have Bercy, you have La Villette: all of them formerly massive entrepots of 19th century commerce on the fringes of what is now the periph, all of them erased and recreated as extraordinary pieces of massive public architecture. La Villette has follies. And a geodesic dome. And canals, of course, all of which make it rather special, as does the fact that its deconstructivist design (according to Wikipedia) was influenced by Jacques Derrida.

Was it his idea to make this enormous museum, somewhat of a cross between a railway station and a department store, with enormous spaces specially intended for children, lots of escalators, and some fake dinosaurs? I proceed purposefully downstairs to the “espaces colloques”, locate the salle Agora, switch to French, and start meeting and greeting.

Today’s programme is quite full: Pierre Mounier from EHESS gives a brief overview of the day, and discusses electronic publishing from the revues.org perspective, the need to observe standards, the holistic nature of scholarly writing and reading — that the articles we publish now are the subjects of study of the future, that scholarly communication in digital form has undergone massive changes. I then stagger through quite a lot of my presentation, which is not much improved since I gave up on it last night, but sounds almost interesting in French. They liked the bit about moving from the web of documents to the web of data, and they liked the historical overview; they were I think politely uninterested by the rest, but an English man speaking French is almost as curious a spectacle as a dog dancing on its hind legs, so that’s OK.

Stephane Pouyllau from ADONIS and Shadia Kilouchi from CN2SV gave a comparatiuvely sensible presentation, explaining how ADONIS is addressing archival and related issues; much of the data we study is now born digital (photos, sounds, bibliographies). We heard how the relationship with CN2SV is working out, and also about an interesting inventory project called AOMS, a couple of French iconographic systems, (mediHAL and ICEberg) and of course the celebrated Isidore project. As there were many historians of science in the audience, subsequent discussion focussed on problems of archiving email collections (whose job is it?) rather than the research possibilities offered by “mashing up” what is available.

Richard Walter from IRHT gave a determinedly non-threatening introduction to the activities of that august institution, stressing the need for an intermediary between technical experts and medieval experts, neither of which he claimed to be. Probably because I already know far too much about both camps, I felt that he was protesting too much.

Finally, Christine Blondel, our host from the CRHST, presented her work and that of her colleagues. Their bag is the development of digital archives for preservation of scientific papers (letters, notebooks etc.), notably of Ampere though there are plenty of others: for example a project called Numix is developing spomethjing similar for Gay-Lussac and his circle. Such archives are open, not just in terms of access, (she made a passing comment on the uselessness — because of its business model — of the Oxford Electronic Enlightenment project, during which I studiously looked elsewhere) but also in the extensibility of their content (you never know when a new document is going to turn up, or where). She repeated the orthodoxy of the day about OAI/PMH, RDF, etc. and name-checked another Adonis joint venture called NUMES, which is cataloguing digital resources. She mentioned the possibilities of collaborative transcriptions (e.g. the mss of Flaubert), and some relevant software before speculating about the implications of Google’s purchase of Captcha technologies, which might improve its OCR capabilities (as we’ve recently seen, this is not such bad news at all potentially). She pointed out that virtual archives, combining resources in productive ways, can be intra- as well as inter- archive, citing the development of some scientific instrument across the range of papers in the Ampere archive. She talked about the need to make such collections accessible to the grand publique, about standards and rights problems and the challenges posed by short term funding and changing technologies and the need to bridge cultural divides and to seek professional help… a really good overview, in short. And she dropped quite a few interesting HREFs by way of illustration, notably a project about geological maps of Europe

In discussion Michel Bernard from the Sorbonne (who is, I learned later, one of the brains behind Hubert de Phalese) made some sniffy remarks about the reductive nature of technological change which I (perhaps ill- advisedly) pooh-poohed. Stephane reminded us all that digital publishing is about process not product, that its results ere inherently dynamic and changeable, and we broke up for a really good lunch downstairs.

After lunch, we were promised Maud Ingaro from Lyon (ENS, Cluster 13, Mutec), but she couldn’t make it. This gave more time to hear about some multimedia case studies, notably another double act from Jean-Louis Kerouanton (Université de Nantes) and Alain Michel (Université d’Évry); part of this concerned virtual  reconstructions of the Port of Nantes, but the part I remember was a project which had created a functioning simulation of the Renault factory of the 1920s, lovingly reconstructed in virtual reality on the basis of contemporary plans and photographs. This was as interesting for what it told us about the historical development of the assembly line (essentially, the photos contradict the claims of the management about the efficiency of the process) as it was for the technology deployed (mercifully, no one once mentioned second life)

The day closed with a good presentation about the challenge of maintaining the archaeological record from Elisabeth Bellon (Maison René-Ginouvès, Nanterre), illustrated by work done in digitizing a neolithic site in Cyprus (also funded by ADONIS).

After saying my farewells, I went for a walk around the Park, to have what was left of my mind blown by the deconstructivist architecture. Not only can the French put on a good lunch and a good digital archive, they do public spaces in a way that puts us to shame.

Posted in Reports | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Xaira under a new Hat

Posted on September 30, 2009 by Lou Burnard

To set up Xaira on any machine, I normally proceed as follows:

  1. Get the source from http://xaira.sf.net and unpack it
  2. Run configure, adding required packages till it stops wingeing.
  3. Run the Makefile

On this particular one, the BL’s server running Red Hat, I first had to get connected to it via their super-secure VPN connexion. This involved a fair bit of messing about, downloading and installing a suitable VPN client for Linux, working out how to get said client running, and finding its configuration files, and indeed using the right passwords. Also the promise in the installation script that it would initialise the client at a reboot turns out to be a complete lie. And when the connexion is finally running, no other internet activity is possible on my desktop.
Yesterday I managed to

  • get VPN-connected
  • Unpack the BNC disks, thoughtfully already copied to the machine (takes ages)
  • upload the Xaira source and start configure
  • Install the icu-devel-i386 package

Today, so far, I have

  • managed to remember how to get connected again
  • Upload source for xerces-c-3.0.1 (not unfortunately available as a package yet)
  • Try to build it. The instructions at the XERCES website say there is a reconfiguree utility, but there isn’t, so I just did the default configure, make thing..
    It fell over at the linking stage…

    /usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libnsl.so when searching for -lnsl
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libnsl.a when searching for -lnsl
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libpthread.so when searching for -lpthread
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libpthread.a when searching for -lpthread
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libcurl.so when searching for -lcurl
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libcurl.a when searching for -lcurl
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libicuuc.so when searching for -licuuc
/usr/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /usr/lib/libicuuc.so when searching for -licuuc
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -licuuc
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
  • All of which, suggests that the configure is not doing things right. Maybe it thinks this is a 64 bit machine? (Maybe it *is* a 64 bit machine) Wasted most of the evening tryiong (unsuccessfully) to get a VPN client running under Windows7 so I could investigate further. Grrr.
  • After another day’s looking… sigh, yes, uname confirms that this is indeed a 64 bit machine running a 64 bit kernel. Both 32 and 64 bit libraries are available, but I’m blowed if I can work out how to tell configure which one to use. Back to the drawing board…

Update Using the BL VPN client is such a pain, I have now asked those nice people in NSMS to give us an identical vm to play with instead. It says something about how much we depend on the internet to do anything these days that a working environment in which you can only talk to one machine at a time is just infeasible…

Posted in Hackery | Leave a comment

A text encoding experiment – update

Posted on September 29, 2009 by Lou Burnard

“Let’s sit back and see what happens….” did I say? Within hours of my announcing my previous posting about a text encoding experiment to the organizers of same, I received plaintive emails requesting me to desist. Apparently it had not occurred to them to seek permission for online publication of the digital images distributed to participants from the rights owner for said materials. Or maybe it had, and they just haven’t got round to it yet. It seems a bit weird to me to be promoting an experiment in text encoding where participants cannot share their results or even their sources with anyone other than the experimenter, but I expect that’s what the rats in the  Animal Behaviour labs say too. Anyway, in case you’re wondering, that’s why the images I painstakingly uploaded yesterday have vanished, and why there are no links to my handed in results in the preceding post. If you’re desperate for more, you’ll just have to stop me in the virtual corridor.

Posted in TEI Chat | Leave a comment

A text encoding experiment

Posted on September 28, 2009 by Lou Burnard

A few weeks ago I received an email from the TEI List inviting me (and any of that excellent list’s other hundreds of markup nuts) to participate in some kind of a markup challenge. We were invited to look at image scans of a few pages of textual material (some pages from an early 20th c. guest register), consider ways in which they should be marked up, and (critically) actually do the markup and hand it in by a specific deadline. The deadline hasn’t expired yet, so I don’t know whether this was actually a cunning psychological experiment or a genuine enquiry into the varieties of markup practice now current, or what. Anyway, I thought it might be fun to participate, and also to share my reactions as I proceed, possibly thus ruining the proponents’ experimental design but that’s life in the big city.

The material looks like this:

[image suppressed]

This immediately poses a fairly obvious question about the relative importance of capturing the layout features or the semantic content. I’m guessing that visual features such as the following

  • text straying beyond their designated column
  • text written at a funny angle or otherwise tweaked to fit
  • actual position on the page of text
  • changes of hand or ink

are less interesting than

  • distinguishing names of people from their addresses
  • distinguishing dates of arrival from dates of departure

But I can readily imagine people arguing that changes of hand or ink are really useful ways of identifying something about who wrote the entry and when, and since the organisers have thoughtfully provided us with an HTML image map giving approximate co-ordinates for most items in the (unmarked up) transcript also provided, it would be relatively easy to include information linking bits of the transcript directly to bits of the page image.

And of course the material doesn’t all  look like this. Some of it looks like this:

[image suppressed]

We still have recognisable rows of client data – but the relative positions of their arrival and departure dates are now quite different. Do I care? Well, actually, no I don’t. And that’s why I decided against trying to use the tempting image map data served up on a plate. Instead, my view is that what’s important here is to record as accurately as possible the semantic content. Each row records someone, or some group of someones, registering at this hotel on some date, and (sometimes) when they left. What matters (I am guessing) is who they were, where they came from, how long they stayed.  Each page contains a bunch of guestbook-entries; each entry contains at least the name of a person (sometimes more than one person), plus some parts of an address, plus sometimes a date of arrival and sometimes a date of departure. A few entries have all of these, but the majority are to a greater or lesser extent “incomplete”. And then you have the interesting problem of “ditto marks”. Some times you have a dash, sometimes a splot that might be a double quote mark, sometimes you have the strange word “do”, indicating that the item in some column should be understood as being copied from the item in the preceding row. (Or, ugh, part of it)

So my first attempt looks like this

<entry>
<dateArrival>23 Sept:</dateArrival>
<client>
<name>E.A. Coltmany</name>
<address>Burbank. Burley. Hants:</address>
</client>
<dateDeparture>24th Sept:</dateDeparture>
</entry>
<entry>
<dateArrival></dateArrival>
<client>
<name>Ken Doncaster</name>
<address>Byway</address>
</client>
<dateDeparture></dateDeparture>
</entry><entry>
<dateArrival>May 1st</dateArrival>
<client>
<name>E. d. Bloomfield</name>
<address>Hines Park Waterford</address>
</client>
<dateDeparture></dateDeparture>
</entry>

Do I care that the order of presentation of the components in the markup is not quite the same as that in the original? I’ll think about that later. Do I care that I am going to have to make up lots of special purpose tags? I’ll come back to that later too.

If we’re not really interested in the way these entries are written, but in what they talk about, then we really really need some way of normalising the names of people and places. The great thing about the TEI of course is that it provides mechanisms for doing this: I can link the names in my transcripts to some other place where they can be normalised or glossed. That might  be a canonical home elsewhere on the web for information about the person or placed referred to (Wikipedia maybe), or it might be a quickly constructed canonical shack I’ve hacked together for the purpose myself, using the TEI’s fine module for people and places.   Off I scurry to ask Mr Google (and other suitable authorities) whether they have heard of any of the people or places listed in these pages. This is dangerously close to being fun, so I don’t attempt it for the whole of the text. But I am pleased to be able to use the standard TEI linking mechanisms to record in my TEI header my opinion that the “W Rowley Bristow” who stayed at the hotel in February 1935 (address Harley St) is probably the Walter Rowley Bristow (12 Dec 1882 – 1947) listed in Who’s Who in Orthopedics; as I am to associate the cursory reference to “Col: H Ramsden-Jodrell” of Taxal Lodge, Whaley Bridge, with his full biographical note on a rather useful website called http://www.thepeerage.com. So this what real researchers do all day!

Normalising the dates is a comparatively mechanical exercise, which I do with a bunch of emacs macros; on a closer look, I also see that some of the dates seem to have been rewritten or corrected, which I inconsistently decide it is worth marking up (with <tei:subst> and friends) even though arguably a presentational matter. The normalization process also helps a bit with the “ditto” problem, since it doesn’t feel dishonest to add the normalised value for a date which is not there but implied by a ditto mark. Sadly, I can’t see how to do that for placenames similarly implied. They will have to be represented by appropriate pointer elements.

As a concession to those who do care about the appearance of this text, I have defined a facsimile element in my document, and used the lazy person’s method of linking page break elements to page images defined within it. If I was more interested in the physicality of the source (for example the fact that the first few pages are loose leaf) I’d probably do a lot more about defining surfaces and zones as well. But one has to make choices in any encoding exercise, even imaginary ones.

It’s only when I am speeding out of the channel tunnel and thinking about generating a schema that I realise I could make the whole thing much simpler. My final model just needs one new element, which I think of as a specialised kind of paragraph-like thing called “guest”, recording everything that the guestbook tells us about a particular stay by one or more people — its dates, the names, and placenames involved. Since each these subcomponents clearly appear in various orders and varying quantities, trying to make a more complex substructure to accomodate them is just taking a rod to my own wossname. So I redefine my guest element to contain any old mixture of text, <tei:date>,  <tei:persName>, <tei:placeName>, and useful TEI global elements, and to be datable. Bang out an appropriately cut down ODD and we’re done.

So here’s my final version:

<my:guest from="1927-08-27">
<persName>Mary Stokes</persName>
<placeName>Monerakelle,</placeName>
<placeName ref="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneragala_District">Moneragalla</placeName>,
<placeName>Ceylon.</placeName>
<date>27th August</date>
</my:guest>
<my:guest from="1927-09-23" to="1927-09-24">
<persName>E.A. Coltmany</persName>
<placeName>Burbank.</placeName> <placeName>Burley.</placeName> <placeName>Hants:</placeName>
<date>23 Sept:</date>
<date>24th Sept:</date>
</my:guest>
<my:guest>
<persName>Ken Doncaster</persName>
<placeName>Byway</placeName>
</my:guest>

Completing my homework, or at least making it less incomplete, is then a matter of generating an ODD, splitting up the existing <address> elements into component placeNames (a very useful exercise), and validating everything. The usual fighting with namespaces and xInclude. Oh but there’s so much more one could do… Anyway, here’s a zip file containing my resulting marked up text, and here’s another containing the associated ODD, schema and doc files. And I handed it in before the deadline, too. Let’s sit back and see what happens….

Posted in TEI Chat | Leave a comment

Le bloggingue

Posted on September 10, 2009 by Lou Burnard

At the CLEO Summer School in Marseille, I’m trying to concentrate on the presentation about “le blogging scientifique”, but being distracted by the same summer school’s twitter feed. (On which someone has just posted a link to his useful summary There is definitely a difference between taking notes in a relatively focussed way, and trying to keep up with the tweets; and there’s another difference between blogging as a tool (what you can do with it) and blogging as a phenomenon (what actually happens). Pierre Mounier’s talk this morning tried to place blogging in the great scientific tradition of epistolary communication: an inheritor of 17th c manuscript discussion, etc. (an idea from J C Guedon it appears), as distinct from formal scientific publication. OK, but in practice how much scientific discussion takes place in the scientific blogosphere? I suppose the only way to find out is to join it. Which brings me to wonder whether or not our lovely new web service actually supports trackbacks, now that I’ve found out what they are?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Let’s chat, genetically

Posted on August 28, 2009 by Lou Burnard 
[Tue Aug 25 2009 15:18:11] Elena: hi Lou
[Tue Aug 25 2009 15:18:34] lou burnard: That is one very scarey icon you have there
[Tue Aug 25 2009 15:18:56] Elena: :)
[Tue Aug 25 2009 15:18:56] … I am terribly scary!
[Tue Aug 25 2009 15:19:31] lou burnard: OK... i have to do some non-TEI work for the next hour or so, but will be back on your case then, OK?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 15:19:52] Elena: (Edited by elena_pierazzo on Tue Aug 25 2009 15:20:02) I will be here shivering with impatience
[Tue Aug 25 2009 15:20:07] … :)
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:44:54] lou burnard: still shivering?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:49:11] Elena: here I am
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:49:24] lou burnard: some new questions...
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:49:30] Elena: shoot
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:49:58] lou burnard: 2.1.2.5 "@timing ... @instant"  -- these dont seem to be documented anywhere?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:50:28] Elena: dammit, I forgot
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:50:37] … (blush)
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:50:45] … point is that I am not really sure about it
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:50:58] … so I left it behind to think about it a little bit more
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:50:59] … then I forgot
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:51:02] lou burnard: an example would help to make you sure! if you cannot think of one it's probly a bad idea.
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:51:20] Elena: I can think of many examples
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:51:32] … the things I'm not sure is how to call teh attribute
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:51:38] … and how to use it
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:51:52] lou burnard: ok... 2.1.2.6 the <undo> example points to its parent ?!?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:52:06] Elena: the attribute how I see ti should a boolean....
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:52:23] … hang on, looking for it
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:53:53] … ok, yes it does, it means that it is undoing the element to which it points
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:54:19] lou burnard: but it isn't! it's only undoing part of it.
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:54:46] Elena: yes, it is undoing the 'function' espressed by that element
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:55:10] … otherwise how should you that?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:55:12] lou burnard: but not for the whole element, which is what the @target is pointing to
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:55:45] Elena: I see your point, but how would you espress it?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:56:15] lou burnard: either you need to have a special rule which explains what it means to put an <undo> inside something else, or you have to do the undoing by means of a standoff pointer
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:56:40] Elena: what do you mean bya a special rule?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:57:19] … the prose isn't enough?, there I say: Normally the element <ge:undo> would contain the element to be undone, except in the case of partial undoing as in the following example taken from Giacomo Leopardi's Zibaldone
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:57:40] lou burnard: the prose is not enough, sorry. computers don't read prose.
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:57:55] Elena: OK, so you are thinking to a smultron or similar?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:58:07] lou burnard: I bthink the concept of "undo" needs tighter definitions.
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:58:23] Elena: Ok
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:58:43] … can you make me an example?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:58:50] lou burnard: will ponder that...
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:58:55] Elena: OK
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:59:24] lou burnard: One more thing for today: @mod and <mod>
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:59:30] Elena: yes
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:59:41] lou burnard: I don't think you need <mod>
[Tue Aug 25 2009 16:59:57] … if it's only purpose is to provide something for @mod to point to
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:00:17] … why not use an xpointer?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:00:36] Elena: mmmm we discussed it, it is a way a. to give a context to a modification in order to understand its rationale, and 2. to reset the counter of a @seq
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:00:51] … @mod point not to <mod> but to <modNote>
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:01:06] lou burnard: that's not what it says in the doc.
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:01:39] Elena: "In many cases it is necessary to scope a portion of text in which one or more alteration occurs, in order to give the necessary context for any editorial discussion. For that purpose we have introduced an element <ge:mod>, which occurs within a <ge:line> or a <p> or any block and phrasal level elements. "
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:01:47] lou burnard: I can see why you want <modNote>, that's fine. But yhou also say "It is necessary to scope a portion of text (shd be doc!) in which..."
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:02:03] … er yes, that;'s what I am complaining about!
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:02:09] … but you can type faster than me
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:02:13] Elena: :)
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:02:54] lou burnard: there just seem to be too many ways to do the same thing
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:02:58] Elena: I lost the part in which I speak about @mod
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:03:35] … I don't think so, perhaps I do explain things badly but here is the rationale:
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:03:50] … 1.modNote in teh heade to explain what happened
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:04:05] … 2. @mod to point from the text/document to the modNote
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:04:52] … 3. <mod> to scope portions of text (I think it's text) to give a context in order to explain modification
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:05:24] … I agree that you could use ,seg> instead of <mod>
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:05:26] … <seg>
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:05:47] … it is same as <seg type="modified-segment">
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:05:51] lou burnard: yes, or ab or p or zone or anything!
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:06:14] … or line
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:06:24] Elena: yes, it is just tht I thought we could have a specific element for that
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:06:33] … so In case you think it is too much
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:06:43] … then we can explain how to use other elements for that
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:07:21] lou burnard: ok, will reconsider (now I look at my notes, i see i was actually confused about which way the pointing was going)
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:07:36] Elena: sure
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:08:33] lou burnard: sorry i havent had time to finish reading thro today... will try to do a bit more this pm.
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:08:56] Elena: that's fine, I think you are really really helpful here
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:09:09] … in the sense that you really help me to think straight :)
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:09:31] lou burnard: it's what we editors try to do, innit?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:09:43] Elena: indeed
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:12:29] lou burnard: could you find me an example of what you want to achieve with the @toiming attribute mentioned above?
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:12:39] Elena: sure
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:12:39] lou burnard: @timing
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:12:44] Elena: I'll look for it
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:13:23] lou burnard: OK, have to go now. Just remembered I havent finished a job for the boss.
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:13:33] Elena: sure, I'll email it to you
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:13:39] lou burnard: tx
[Tue Aug 25 2009 17:13:47] Elena: pleasure
[Wed Aug 26 2009 11:29:26] lou burnard: Good morning!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 11:30:32] Elena: good morning - I am bit busy at the moment
[Wed Aug 26 2009 11:30:47] … I am completely free in the afternoon though
[Wed Aug 26 2009 11:31:09] lou burnard: ok. just checking in to say that I now understand transposition!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 11:31:19] Elena: (party)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 11:31:32] lou burnard: and have a new suggestion about "instant corrections"
[Wed Aug 26 2009 11:31:47] … will continue, and send you email
[Wed Aug 26 2009 11:31:49] Elena: lovely!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:09:20] lou burnard: good afternoon!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:09:33] Elena: hallo!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:09:42] … I was just opening the file to answer to your emails!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:11:31] … do you prefer to discuss the points via skype or me to email you?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:11:52] lou burnard: dont mind, whatevers easier for you
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:12:07] Elena: ok, let's start then
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:12:12] … 1. >
> I think what was confusing me was the use of the word "previous" -- i
> understood it to mean "physically preceding" rather than "prior in
> time". And by "cross-cutting" you mean "spanning", I think.
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:12:21] … (transposition)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:12:27] … indeed you are right!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:12:55] … 2. List item 3 says that a metaMark should be comntained by an add or a
del, but I think you mean by the tr don't you? certainly it makes more
sense to put it inside than outside (note that it will be "inside" even
if the tr is spanning). The example has it outside, which I think is wrong.
List item 4 ought to mention that you use the standoff <transpositions>
element to do the realignment.
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:13:22] … OK for the part in which you say 'inside ,tr>
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:13:32] … but I also meant inside the <add>
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:13:57] … as the metamark has  been indeed added as well
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:14:26] lou burnard: could a metamark ever NOT be added?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:14:34] Elena: that's a good question
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:14:38] … :)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:14:49] … I take your point
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:15:05] … 3. You suggest putting the <transpotitions> element inside the
<profileDesc>. I'm not sure about that: since it's about how the text is
encoded, maybe it should be inside the encodingDesc? are there other
things like this that also need a home somewhere?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:15:38] … I think it aslo matter on how the docuemtn is organised, not just encoded
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:15:59] … that's why I thought of profidesc
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:16:56] lou burnard: well, the <creation> is inside <profileDesc>
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:17:32] Elena: yes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:17:35] lou burnard: but this <transpositions> is more about how to make sense of the encoding in the document -- i.e. that this version of the document should be read in the specified order
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:17:56] Elena: not sure about that
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:18:04] lou burnard: so it's about the document encoding. But it's an open question
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:18:04] Elena: the point is that it make sense in both order
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:18:10] … it is a question of the time of revision
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:18:26] lou burnard: eh?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:18:35] Elena: meaning that in the first plac ethe author wrote on one order
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:18:41] … then he/she modiefed it
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:19:25] lou burnard: yes. but in your encoding,  since it's in XML, the order is fixed by your encoding. you want to say that there is however another order possible. so it's about varying the encoding.
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:19:37] Elena: OK
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:19:52] … I don't have a strong feeling about that, so if you think it is better, I'm OK
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:20:03] … I just wanted to understand and make sure I get the point
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:20:26] … About instant corrections: I love you rproposal
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:20:27] lou burnard: sure
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:20:58] … oh! my turn to say(sun)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:21:09] Elena: the only point I think is how to call @seq
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:21:15] … seq > stage > state
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:21:38] … I think stage was Moritz early proposal which we say that it was to close to <stage> to work
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:21:43] lou burnard: i dont like seq, because it implies linearity which i dont think is justified
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:21:56] … stage and stage are indeed close
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:22:07] … but tTEI also already has state!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:22:30] Elena: I missed that one
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:23:10] … I can't find state in the list of attributes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:23:13] … where is it?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:23:19] lou burnard: is an element
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:23:31] Elena: oh! so there is <stage> and ,state>
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:23:40] … cool
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:23:57] … then I think stage is more semantically correct
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:24:35] lou burnard: ok, let's go with @stage for now
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:24:42] … and keep moritz happy!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:24:50] Elena: :)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:25:02] … <end of first email>
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:25:13] … <beginning of second email>
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:27:03] … I'm not sure I understood your problem with <geenticGroup>
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:27:17] … 1. you don't like <link/>
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:27:26] … and prefer <ptr/>, right?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:28:08] … "In this case, is there any reason not to use just a bunch of <ptr>s,
each indicating one... er, what are these things anyway?"
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:28:38] … <ptr/> is fine for me, but I thought we wanted to group them somehow
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:28:49] … (Edited by elena_pierazzo on Wed Aug 26 2009 14:33:41) they point to different version of the text
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:28:58] … (Edited by elena_pierazzo on Wed Aug 26 2009 14:33:54) which can be in the same document or in other documents
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:35:30] … I think you might be busy, so better if I write yoy an email that you can read wheneve you have time
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:36:02] lou burnard: ok, whatever... i was distracted by a visitor just now
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:36:13] Elena: ah you're back
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:36:22] … it's ok then
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:37:03] lou burnard: linkGrp can contain a bunch of ptrs or a bunch of links.
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:37:23] Elena: OK, so you prefer linkGrp/ptr(s)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:37:27] … fine by me
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:37:38] lou burnard: yes, because link introduces an ambiguoity
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:37:50] Elena: perfect
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:38:14] lou burnard: <link targets="#a #b"/> does it mean #a and #b or the concatenation of #a and #b and ois it the same as #b #a?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:38:29] Elena: I see your point
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:38:57] lou burnard: if you use ptr, then the order is explicit
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:39:05] Elena: sure
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:39:25] … then you asked what they point at
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:39:41] … they points to texts or to documents
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:39:48] lou burnard: aargh!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:40:06] Elena: basically they group 'things' that are genetically related
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:40:17] … so docuemnts that contains different version of the text
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:40:33] … or different version of the same text within the same docuemnt
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:40:38] lou burnard: or fragments of document?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:40:43] Elena: precisely
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:40:55] lou burnard: so an xpath could be used
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:41:01] … sorry, xpointer
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:41:07] Elena: yes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:41:16] … it may be very suseful, actually
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:41:20] lou burnard: e.g. to say from #foo to #bar
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:41:43] … without having to define a <tr> or <seg> or whatever
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:41:52] Elena: yes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:42:00] lou burnard: ok. next
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:42:06] Elena: nodes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:42:20] … "a node represents one version or a text" -> "of a text" presumably, but
don't you mean "document"?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:42:29] … I mean 'of a text'
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:42:58] … as said before for genticGrp, same situation
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:43:18] … @target "... points to a file" No it doesn't! it points to an XML object!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:43:24] … you are right
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:44:08] … then
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:44:09] … Why introduce the indirection of making <node>s? If the @target values
for your <node> elements are all actual nodes in the XML document (which
they seem to be -- I'm not sure because your example doesnt define what
e.g. #poem is) why not just point directly to these from the <arc>s? If
the only purpose is to introduce a meaningful label (like "A") then
that's what the  @n attribute is for.
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:44:25] … cool! I didn't know you could do that
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:44:37] … all examples I saw got first all the nodes then the arcs
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:44:55] … for us nodes are just redundant
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:45:02] lou burnard: well, i dont know wjhether you can do that, i was just asking what nodes were for
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:45:20] Elena: OK, keep down my enthusiasm
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:45:40] lou burnard: but for you, nodes are redundant?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:45:45] Elena: yes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:46:06] … the things to be connected via arc have already been defined eslwhere
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:46:15] … they are actually XML nodes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:46:19] … as you say
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:46:33] lou burnard: yes, that's what i thought. So in fact the arcs are just ...... <links>!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:46:46] Elena: more or less, yes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:46:50] lou burnard: ok
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:46:58] Elena: the only thing is that we need to annotate it
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:47:23] … so I have added edJust (or note) within arc
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:47:59] lou burnard: yes, but i wd rather do it with the existing desc, gloss, etc.
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:48:12] … for consistency
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:48:44] Elena: the idea was to use the same element thoroughout the docuemnt to discuss genetic problem
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:49:05] lou burnard: but every element discusses genetic problems in some sense!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:49:17] Elena: sorry, I reformulate
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:49:22] lou burnard: so you only need one... <geneticProblem>
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:49:26] … :-)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:49:43] Elena: contain editorial statements
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:49:58] … all editorial statement within 1 element
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:49:59] lou burnard: markup is an editorial statement of some kind
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:50:13] Elena: reformulate again
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:50:25] … contain editorial 'prose' statements
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:50:34] lou burnard: saying what the arc is meant to represent is a description of the arc, not an editorial statement
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:51:05] Elena: the ideas is more to be able to dscuss the reason that are at the base of establishing the arc
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:51:38] … for instance: this is an arc becuase of this evidence and this other evidence
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:52:24] … most of these arcs will be very controversial
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:52:43] lou burnard: OK, I see that but that's not what your example does.
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:52:55] Elena: That is quite possible
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:53:06] lou burnard: The Whitman example is just descriptoive
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:53:15] Elena: I meant to ask Ken and Brett to help me with that as I only had access to the document on the web
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:53:18] … but I run out of time
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:54:30] … next?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:54:58] lou burnard: relation?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:55:01] Elena: Similarly, but more strongly, I don't think you're using <relation>
correction. <relation> is for specific instances of a type of
relationship, not for types of relationship per se. I think you want ta
@type (or @relationType if you prefer) attribute on <arc>.
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:55:04] … yep
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:55:26] … What we thought is to create some kind of taxonomy of the types of relations
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:55:34] … to be used by the arcs
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:55:51] … and we wanted to describe the type of relation
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:55:55] lou burnard: sure, but that's something else: you'd do that in the valList of you ODD
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:56:28] Elena: sure, but that doesn't allow you to say if a relation is mutual, etc
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:56:42] … the real point was to be able to describe it
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:56:46] lou burnard: yes it does
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:56:59] Elena: I haven't done it because I am really not sure how to describe the relation
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:57:25] … how so?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:58:19] lou burnard: well, let's wait for a real example then...
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:58:39] Elena: OK, I know that Moritz had many ideas about it
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:58:50] … which I don't I am afraid
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:59:04] lou burnard: you agree that a relation instance is not the same as a relation type at least. the tei element is for tjhe for,mer, not the latter
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:59:15] Elena: yes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:59:45] … that's why, by the way, I had introduce a <geneticRel> element in the previous version
[Wed Aug 26 2009 14:59:54] … because I thought they where not the same thing
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:00:28] … but I think we better leave as it is and discuss with the others, as I  have no ideas, really
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:00:34] … next
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:00:37] … collation
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:00:52] … I agree that it's important to distinguish between intra-document and
inter-document variation. I don't think anyone's come up with a better
way of doing the latter than what we currently have in <app>, but that
doesn't seem appropriate to the genetic approach at all. So I think this
document should just point out the problem, unless we have a better
solution. What do current systems actually do to mark up the results of
a collation anyway?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:01:12] … why you say that: but that
doesn't seem appropriate to the genetic approach at all
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:01:25] … I don't understand
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:04:37] lou burnard: because it distinguishes lemma and reading
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:05:09] Elena: you are right, in a sense, but to a point
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:05:37] lou burnard: as i understand it, you have readings and that;s all
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:05:41] Elena: 1. teh only Schools that will ever attempt a collations are the Italians and the Germans
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:05:56] lou burnard: and in a single document you only have one set of readings anyway
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:06:04] Elena: 2. they recognise the value of the 'final version', not like the French
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:06:06] lou burnard: we could tell the italians and germans to stick to cheeze
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:06:27] Elena: so for many of them the use of <lem> and <rdg> will be justified
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:06:27] lou burnard: no, better, stick to wine and beer respectively
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:06:28] Elena: :D
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:07:27] … because their purpose a) the process and b) one finel critical version
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:07:39] lou burnard: seriously tho: it's something that many people will find strange in a document about genetic criticsm
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:07:49] Elena: while the Frence will say tha A) alone is important and c) all teh witnesses in the way they are
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:08:26] lou burnard: je suis spartacus
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:08:41] Elena: (Edited by elena_pierazzo on Wed Aug 26 2009 15:08:58) I agree in a asnes, but you need to convince Fotis abou tit: he is the one that feels very strongly about it becuse he actually do gentic edition (I do only partially and Malte doesn't) and use the apparatus a lot
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:09:16] lou burnard: i'm not saying he cant do apparatus, i am just saying it doesn't need to be talked about in this document
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:09:32] … expecially since we dont have any special tags fpor it -- we just point to what the tei already does
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:09:59] Elena: I think this is another point we should discuss in W.
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:10:03] lou burnard: ok
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:10:29] … well, we are now at the section on time, and i have not yet had time to read it
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:10:37] Elena: You don't need @from and @to on <rdg> by the way, because you can use an
xpointer as the value for @wit
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:10:37] … last point
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:10:49] … you are quite right, master
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:10:56] … (bow)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:11:06] lou burnard: wjhat on earth was that splodge?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:11:23] Elena: splodge? I don't know this word
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:11:40] lou burnard: spot, smudge, splatter
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:12:02] … emoticon
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:12:08] Elena: well, I just meant that you are the master of TEI, aren't you? I keep forgetting things
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:12:18] … ahhh
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:12:36] … the emoticon is just ridicoulus, and therefore funny (at least fo rme)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:12:57] … and it meand 'bow'
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:12:59] lou burnard: but communicative, to a degree.,,,
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:13:03] … ah, tx
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:13:26] … there doesnt seem to be one for patting you on the head and sayingf "go in peace my child and sin no more"
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:13:38] Elena: not yet, but you can propose it
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:13:58] … I'm sure there will be plenty of users that will love it
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:14:01] … ;)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:14:05] lou burnard: (^) have some cake anyway
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:14:11] Elena: tx!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:14:29] … OK, whenever you want to speak about time....
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:14:37] … I'll be right here
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:15:00] lou burnard: ok, i have to sit on helpdesk for next couple hours
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:15:27] … BTW, what i'd like to do now is go thro the doc and edit it fairly seriously. probably two passes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:15:37] Elena: I will leave the office around 5:45/6
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:15:48] lou burnard: pass 1: to correct typos
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:15:56] … pass 2: to clarify and expand examples
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:16:01] Elena: sure
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:16:29] lou burnard: you're disappearing on friday?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:16:39] Elena: yes, at around 3pm
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:16:45] lou burnard: no email after that?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:16:46] Elena: for a week
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:17:01] … nope, I will devote my time to my sister and newly born niece
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:17:20] lou burnard: ok: i saw you have become a tata! congrats
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:17:30] Elena: thanks, so exciting!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:17:39] lou burnard: your first?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:17:41] Elena: yes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:17:50] lou burnard: aunts are very special, according to my daughters anyway
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:18:09] Elena: I hope so, I plan to become a very very special one
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:18:56] … anyway, I will check email, but I cannot promise I will replay or I will be able to say something sensible without having the doc in fron t of me
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:19:00] … sorry
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:19:30] lou burnard:  no problem... you can always revert anything you don't like, and see what I have changed, thanks to the wonders of subversion
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:19:45] Elena: yes, but I am sure I will like it
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:19:59] … anyway, ther is still tomorrow and Friday morning
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:20:26] lou burnard: OK.  ciao for niao
[Wed Aug 26 2009 15:20:32] Elena: ciao ciao
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:09:03] lou burnard: hmmm
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:09:25] Elena: that doesn't sound promising
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:09:59] lou burnard: you're using timeLine in a nonstandard way. As defined, you point at it from your document, not the other way round
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:10:26] Elena: am I?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:10:44] … I thought I was  pointing from timeline to the document
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:10:44] lou burnard: also, you may not have noticed there was a recent fix so that you dont need to specify @origin
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:10:55] Elena: no I miised that
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:11:04] lou burnard: yes, you are. whereas in TEI at present, you shd point from doc to timeline
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:11:16] … using @sync attribute
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:11:26] Elena: ah...
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:11:37] … I followed the example in the Guidelines....
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:12:15] lou burnard: which one?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:12:29] Elena: no, I did not.... I simply misundersttod it
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:12:41] … (Edited by elena_pierazzo on Wed Aug 26 2009 16:13:04) that's why I added the target
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:12:52] … because I was finding it a bit strange
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:14:00] … but I think it make more sense here, because if you have alterantive timelines
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:14:10] … it is complicate to use sync
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:15:34] lou burnard: why?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:16:12] … give us a real example
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:16:19] Elena: in the sense that you don't have the immediate perception of what is in alternation
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:16:33] … well the example i put ther eis not completly fake
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:16:35] lou burnard: you dont have immediate perception of ANYTHING in this dense tagging!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:16:57] Elena: in the sense that it is not cleare which dates those two docuemtn have
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:18:07] lou burnard: i am looking aty the sleepers example. what is it meant to tell me?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:19:27] Elena: It means that the two manuscripts (the one I called Shroud -first word of the title, and Curse 2 -- I am a curse, second Ms with this title) have not clear dating
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:19:37] … so we don't know which one come first
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:19:51] lou burnard: so you cannot use @sync for them
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:20:06] Elena: that's what I thought
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:20:26] … so I thought that you could do it the other way around
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:20:31] … and make sense
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:20:41] lou burnard: but i dont understand what your markup is saying
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:21:05] … so its not making sense!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:21:10] Elena: ok, the markup assume that each of the witnesses in teh webpage is marked by an id
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:21:23] … like poem, sweet_flag etc
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:21:28] lou burnard: i get that
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:21:50] Elena: then with the timeline I am creating a cronology for them
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:22:01] … following the order of the whens
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:22:14] … in one case (the last) we have an absolute date
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:22:19] lou burnard: but you just said you dont know where those two fit
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:22:25] … the one you do know, is fine
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:22:40] Elena: in all other we just think of them as one after the others
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:23:06] … in case of shroud and curse2 we know they come both after efflux and before topple_down
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:23:22] … but we don't know which of the two come first
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:23:51] … so the order can be:
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:24:01] … efflux shroud curse2
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:24:09] … or efflux curse2 shroud
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:24:55] … there is an error in the markup I just noticed: one of the two timeline within choice should have weight="0.2"
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:24:59] … and not both 0.8
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:25:13] lou burnard: ah that helps a bit
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:26:02] … so you have a when which T1 (when efflux appeared), and two other whens
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:26:12] … sorry, give me a mo
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:26:17] Elena: sure
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:27:00] lou burnard: you have three whens, T1 T2 T3
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:27:11] Elena: yes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:27:14] lou burnard: T2 and T3 are both after T1
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:27:27] Elena: yes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:27:30] lou burnard: but you don't know whether T2 is before T3 or not
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:27:36] Elena: precisely
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:27:44] lou burnard: indeed they might possibly be at the same time!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:27:59] Elena: in theory, but unlikely
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:28:06] lou burnard: (he had two hands right?)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:28:10] Elena: sure
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:29:46] lou burnard: i think that's all you need. then you sync your three poems with the appropriate when. It doesnt matter whether you sync e.g. shroud with T2 or T3, since all you;re saying is that it's after T1
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:30:04] … and they both are
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:30:22] Elena: but how do you shuffle then?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:30:23] lou burnard: where it gets com[plicated is when you want to give certainty etc
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:30:30] … you don't shuffle them
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:30:56] Elena: but I do want to say that one is after the other...
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:31:02] … just not sur which
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:31:28] … point is that we do have very complicated timelines all teh time
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:31:50] … and in many cases they do not concern 2 witnesses, but many others...
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:32:12] … I remeber Paolo showing me some examples for Nietsche
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:32:58] lou burnard: ok, but dont forget : whereof we cannot speak, thereof we must remain silent
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:33:03] … (Wittgenstein)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:36:00] Elena: sure...
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:51:52] lou burnard: hello?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:51:59] Elena: yes
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:52:23] … were you waiting for me to say something?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:53:13] lou burnard: just checking my connexion was alive!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:53:20] Elena: it is
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:53:25] lou burnard: anyway, last thing i wanted to add:
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:53:37] … modNote, geneticNote, edJust ....
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:53:43] … they';re all <note>s to me
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:54:05] … and the argument about wanting to have them "near" the thing they're about cuts no ice!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:54:36] … oh and another thing
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:54:41] Elena: yes for the first two, but I think I followed the example of handlist handnote
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:54:58] lou burnard: eh?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:55:15] … why not us
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:55:22] Elena: modGrp/modNote --> handlist/handNote
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:55:43] lou burnard: yes, I see that,
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:55:50] Elena: I think handNote is as much of a note as modNote
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:55:55] lou burnard: but then why edJust instead of note
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:56:12] … since it might not actually be anything to do with edityorial justification
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:56:38] Elena: 2 reasons:
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:56:55] … 1. it si more of a note as it include some of the certainty features
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:57:09] lou burnard: (so does note)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:57:57] Elena: 2. <note> is so generic and can be used for so many purposes that we felt we needed something more specific
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:58:11] … in both case I know there aren't any strong feeeling
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:58:25] … so I think we can agree on note
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:58:28] lou burnard: yes but you havent told me in what respect edJust is more specific!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:58:39] Elena: but I would like to hear the other on this point
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:58:44] lou burnard: and all the examples are very general
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:58:48] … ok.
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:59:05] … last question before you go...
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:59:25] Elena: you there are things for which I am convinced, other I am more agnistic
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:59:35] lou burnard: we have @stage to indicate some sort of chronology and we also have @sync
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:59:37] Elena: but I cannot take responsibilites becuse of that!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:59:42] lou burnard: why do we need both?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 16:59:59] Elena: one uses a number scheme (0, 1, 2, 3)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 17:00:16] … the other, rememebr we have not agreed we need it :)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 17:00:34] … it is mentioned in the doc but with abother meaning
[Wed Aug 26 2009 17:00:40] lou burnard: OK, but  functionally they are aiming to do the same thing?
[Wed Aug 26 2009 17:01:01] Elena: yes, more or less
[Wed Aug 26 2009 17:01:14] … they aim to establish a relative chronology
[Wed Aug 26 2009 17:01:26] lou burnard: ok, then i will invoke Occam's razor!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 17:02:00] Elena: sure
[Wed Aug 26 2009 17:02:32] … (again, here is a point for which I am agnostic, i always thought that seq/stage is enough...)
[Wed Aug 26 2009 17:07:13] lou burnard: goodnight!
[Wed Aug 26 2009 17:07:22] Elena: and to you, thank you again!
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:43:52] lou burnard: morning!
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:44:07] Elena: ciao
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:44:17] lou burnard: i just sent you an email
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:44:24] Elena: ok
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:45:00] … not yet here
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:49:07] lou burnard: the key thing is the suggestion to  move into a separate section of the document all the bits that need more discussion
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:49:43] … subject line is "summary" as i started listing the major things i think we agreed yesterday
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:50:01] Elena: ah it's here now
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:51:17] … I agree with your plan
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:51:22] … seesm correct
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:51:52] lou burnard: ok, good
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:51:55] Elena: :)
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:52:12] lou burnard: shouldn't  we also tell fotis, malte, etc?
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:52:40] Elena: yes, but not before they have seen this version
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:52:54] lou burnard: the one i havent finished doing you mean?
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:53:00] Elena: yes
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:53:00] … because it is substantially changed respect the lats they have seen
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:53:13] … otherwise they will be more confuse than anything
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:53:16] lou burnard: no, i dont understand
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:53:53] … do you want them to see the current version before i  do more work on it?
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:54:02] Elena: no, I think you should finish it
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:54:20] … then send an email with a version for them to look and the genral principles
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:54:49] lou burnard: ok.
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:55:01] … can i add myself as an author then?
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:55:17] Elena: yes, please
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:55:26] … you can also add a <change>
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:55:31] … thanks
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:55:40] … I should have done it
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:55:53] lou burnard: ok, i had better stop chatting and start typing then....
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:56:21] Elena: I will be off for a while, then back online around 5
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:56:27] lou burnard: ok, laters
[Thu Aug 27 2009 12:56:29] Elena: ciao caio
[Thu Aug 27 2009 22:26:04] lou burnard: what is @depth attribute in d1 example for?
[11:13:29] … buo n giorno
[11:13:41] Elena: ciao ciao
[11:13:53] lou burnard: tutto bene?
[11:14:01] Elena: benisimo
[11:14:11] … I'm impressed by your italian!
[11:14:18] lou burnard: ench'io...
[11:14:27] Elena: bravo!
[11:14:53] lou burnard: but how about my murdering of your prose?
[11:15:10] Elena: I love my prose after you have murdered it!
[11:15:12] … ;)
[11:15:26] lou burnard: ok, i continue to massacre
[11:15:27] Elena: generally speaking it is great
[11:15:37] … I have a couple of questins fo ryou though...
[11:15:39] lou burnard: specifically tho?
[11:15:46] … shoot!
[11:16:07] Elena: 1. I think you have included the wrong image from the ones prepared by Moritz
[11:16:18] … you have include H3.png
[11:16:25] … but should be D1.png
[11:16:32] … the transcription is abou D1
[11:17:12] lou burnard: correct!
[11:17:17] … easy to fix
[11:17:18] Elena: yep
[11:17:40] … 2. you ahve commented out the attributes for the patch like pinned, detached, etc.patch
[11:17:43] … any particular reason?
[11:17:57] … I think we need to provide such infromation
[11:18:44] lou burnard: yes, havent finished thinking about the patch element
[11:18:57] Elena: Ok fair enough
[11:18:59] … just checking
[11:19:07] … everything else looks great to me
[11:19:15] lou burnard: also have another thought about @rotate
[11:19:23] Elena: meaning?
[11:20:18] … you don't think it is necessary. or...?
[11:20:40] lou burnard: instead of using @rotate on zone, i am now thinking that a rotated surface should be regarded as a different surface
[11:21:05] Elena: I', mot following you
[11:21:12] … you mean that in D! for instance
[11:21:22] … what is written i blue should be another surface?
[11:21:32] lou burnard: ezatamente
[11:21:42] Elena: mmmm why?
[11:22:07] … I thought surface had something to do with the physical support
[11:22:13] … so ok for the page and for a patch
[11:22:18] lou burnard: because the writer is treating the surface as if it was a new piece of paper
[11:22:26] Elena: not all the time
[11:22:35] lou burnard: think about a palimpsest for example
[11:22:49] Elena: when for instac it want just add things on the borders and writes all along
[11:22:56] … becase ther is no space
[11:23:11] lou burnard: writing in the borders etc. is a different case i think
[11:23:20] … it's just another zone
[11:23:24] Elena: but then the surface can be rotates
[11:23:52] … we actually discussed the case of a palympsest and whe thouthg about layers
[11:24:03] lou burnard: yes, layers are like surfaces too
[11:24:20] Elena: so, to answer to a question you made last night that's the function of teh depth attribute
[11:24:41] lou burnard: so think of the @depth as indicating the surface
[11:24:53] Elena: yes
[11:25:03] lou burnard: you have multiple surfaces on which you can identify multiple zones
[11:25:17] … each zone in a given surface uses the same co-ordinate system
[11:25:24] Elena: I don't like the idea fo multpile surfaces...
[11:25:27] lou burnard: why?
[11:25:45] Elena: because to me they are one surface with layerd zones
[11:26:23] … the physical support (surface) is one
[11:27:14] lou burnard: one what?
[11:27:31] Elena: one physical support
[11:27:54] lou burnard: but (e.g. patches) we know that the single physical support has multiple components
[11:28:17] Elena: yes, I agree in case of patches as they are other physical supports
[11:28:33] lou burnard: and we also know that the relationship between orientation of phys support and orientation of zone can change as in palimpsest
[11:28:57] … zones are identified by the encoder
[11:28:58] Elena: yes, that's why coordinates and orientation are provided for zones
[11:29:29] … yes, based on the layout of writing
[11:29:32] lou burnard: i  need to draw on a board to exp;lain better
[11:29:43] Elena: no I follow your thinking
[11:29:59] … it is just that I cannot accept that theya re different surfaces
[11:30:15] … because to me surface is done by materiality
[11:30:38] … so I wouldn't object on creating a <layer> intermediate element
[11:30:53] … but I think it is more economic to use <zone> for that
[11:31:35] lou burnard: is the reverse of a leaf a different surface?
[11:31:42] Elena: yes
[11:32:05] lou burnard: the reverse of a leaf is accessed by rotating it round one axis, right?
[11:32:16] Elena: we are in fact speaking of surface and not of leaves
[11:32:23] lou burnard: so if i rotate it round another axis, the result should also be another surface!
[11:32:50] … and you were speaking about surface *physicality* i believe¬!
[11:33:01] Elena: no really, we are speaking again of a surface, if you rotate a *leave; you have another surface
[11:33:13] … so leaves have two surfaces
[11:33:35] … but surfaces are bi-dimensional
[11:34:37] lou burnard: hmmm
[11:34:43] Elena: hmmm
[11:34:51] lou burnard: coffee time, clearly
[11:34:58] Elena: (coffee)
[11:35:58] lou burnard: well, i will leave @rotate alone for now anyway
[11:36:31] Elena: thanks!
[11:36:40] lou burnard: are you happy with the discussion about document/text ?
[11:36:58] Elena: I am indeed
[11:37:06] … I think it make loads of sense
[11:37:16] … it makeS
[11:37:27] … (always forget my Ss)
[11:38:24] lou burnard: ok, thanks: i think i have plenty more to do now
[11:38:39] Elena: (blush)
[11:39:08] … sorry again, I thought your task was les demanding....
[11:39:15] … but I realise it is huge
[11:39:21] lou burnard: it's my fault for getting too interested :-(
[11:39:30] … don't apologise
[11:39:52] Elena: thanks so much, anyway! I really appreciate it!\
[11:40:14] lou burnard: i will have to take a break to work on something else for next week over the weekend... but should get a bit further today
[11:40:27] … will give you an update after lunch
[11:40:29] … ciao
[11:40:44] Elena: I'll leave at around 2:30/45
[11:40:50] lou burnard: ok
[11:41:03] … flying from london city?
[11:41:16] Elena: I wish
[11:41:19] … Stansted
[11:41:29] … plane ias at 7!
[11:41:37] lou burnard: yuk...
[11:42:07] Elena: ther is no flight to venice from london city....
[11:42:42] lou burnard: i wd have gone by train -- overnight paris-milan is very comfortable
[11:43:00] … but i am quite mad
[11:43:16] Elena: you said that ;)
[11:43:41] lou burnard: 8-|
[11:44:20] … ok, am going to seek out my (coffee) now... later
[11:44:27] Elena: ciao caio
[13:04:05] lou burnard: am wondering about the date in D1
[13:04:11] … should it not be a metaMark?
[13:04:43] Elena: That was one of the things I asked myself to Moritz!
[13:04:49] … the point is that it is a Diary entry
[13:04:56] … so it is actually part of the text
[13:05:14] … while a metamark is when the date doesn't belong to the main text
[13:05:22] … but the distiction is subtle I admit
[13:05:54] lou burnard: for me the poijnt is that the <date> element is an interpretation bdelonging at the text level rather than the documentary one
[13:06:16] Elena: it is
[13:06:28] … that's why I said 'it belong to the text'
[13:06:34] lou burnard: so we agree
[13:06:41] Elena: yes
[13:06:52] lou burnard: in which case, it should not be marked at all !
[13:07:32] Elena: well, you can use <p spanTo, right? so why not date?
[13:11:41] lou burnard: you could say that of anything... why not mark up persName or placeName!
[13:13:20] Elena: wel I thought you would, actually
[13:13:59] lou burnard: because they're all textual, is why not
[13:14:17] Elena: if you decide not to transcribe it twice, namely use docuemnt and text, but just document
[13:14:38] … I thought that you could combine things
[13:14:52] … it is just the structure that is different
[13:15:10] lou burnard: sure, but it seems confusing in our very first example
[13:15:33] Elena: but we always thoguht to be able to mark also semantic-textual feature, in case you want to
[13:16:00] … Ok, I take your point for the example
[13:16:05] lou burnard: ok... but even so, there is a subtle ambiguity in dates
[13:16:15] … i grant that you can mark this as A date
[13:16:24] … but that doesn't mean that is THE date of the entry!
[13:16:34] Elena: yes, that's right
[13:16:58] lou burnard: if the claim is only that it is A date, i have no particular problem
[13:17:24] Elena: Ok, why dont' we take out the date from the first example
[13:17:28] lou burnard: (except that now i have to tweak the content model)
[13:17:35] Elena: ant use it when we mark <p span?
[13:17:41] lou burnard: good idea...
[13:17:53] … sorry, you are trying to pack and i am distracting you
[13:17:59] Elena: no, it's ok
[13:18:03] … I ahve already packed
[13:18:18] lou burnard: i am wondering whether to put the HTML version somewhere where our friends in wuerzburg can read it
[13:18:32] … but there doesnt seem to be anyway to upload html directly to the wiki
[13:18:34] Elena: I think this will be a good idea
[13:18:54] … What I do I that I normally put it in a private space of mine
[13:18:58] … then link it
[13:19:03] … I know it is not safe
[13:19:17] … but the wiki doesn't offer anything  on that respect
[13:24:10] lou burnard: i was reaching same conclusions. ok, ,must
Posted in TEI Chat | Tagged , , | Leave a comment