[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I just joined this list so pardon me if this topic has been dealt with
before, but it is something I have been pondering for some time and about
which I would like expert feedback.
I work with ancient texts in multiple languages, including cuneiform
tablets, inscriptions, parchment and papyri manuscripts. Converting these
texts to XML form presents messy problems because they exhibit rampantly
overlapping hierarchies:
* single graphemes split across line boundaries;
* character effacements occurring randomly in the texts, across lines,
cases, columns, and facets;
* discontiguous parsing information;
An on and on.
My question is why not just use empty tags for everything? And if that
works why have non-empty tags at all? (I'm aware of the argument for XML
parsing simplicity.)
One of my main concerns is data archivability and recoverability, even
data fragment recoverability. For these reasons I want metadata that is
human readable, inline, and practically self-documenting.
Respectfully,
Dean A. Snyder
Scholarly Technology Specialist
Library Digital Programs, Sheridan Libraries
Garrett Room, MSE Library, 3400 N. Charles St.
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218
office: 410 516-6850 fax: 410-516-6229
Manager, Digital Hammurabi Project: www.jhu.edu/digitalhammurabi
|
