Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 362.
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
<http://www.princeton.edu/~mccarty/humanist/>
<http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/>
[1] From: Thierry van Steenberghe (66)
<100342.254@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: 14.0349 encoding vs markup?
[2] From: erose@Princeton.EDU (2)
Subject: Re: 14.0352 funding (NSF/NEH/NEA -- U.S.)
--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 10:47:44 +0100
From: Thierry van Steenberghe <100342.254@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: 14.0349 encoding vs markup?
For what it's good...
Having spent some years preparing a scholarly text for e-publication, I share
the intuition of Fotis Jannidis about the difference between encoding and
markup..
I would also consider that the mere fact that the 'E' in TEI is for
'Encoding', while the 'M' in 'SGML' and other '-ML' acronyms is for 'Markup'
can be taken as some argument suporting this intuition...
The work referred to above did not use the TEI Guidelines directly (because
they do not yet contain specific tagging for the type of text we had,
grammatical text that is), but we used the TEI as a philosophy to help us
define our own specific set of tags (our DTD): this is to explain why I feel
that 'encoding' is *much* more than 'marking up'.
The 'markup' could then be defined as the process of adequately placing the
tags in the text, as well as the result of this process, i.e. the set of
actual tags inserted and effectively marking-up the text. The first meaning
would then be indeed a part of the whole process of 'encoding', consisting of
designing, inserting, checking, maintaining, and possibly even using the
markup.
--
__________________________________
Thierry van Steenberghe
Bruxelles/Belgium
mailto:100342.254@compuserve.com
__________________________________
"Humanist Discussion Group (by way of Willard McCarty )" wrote:
>
> Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 349.
>
>
> --[1]------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:52:17 +0100
> From: "Fotis Jannidis" <fotis.jannidis@lrz.uni-muenchen.de>
> >
> Hello,
>
> for a encyclopedia I am writing an article on "text encoding". I
> discovered that I am not sure how this concept is - in the actual use
> of words - related to "text markup" and whether there is an
> established difference how they are used?
>
> Intuitively I would say that "text encoding" is the more extensive
> concept, also including the intellectual and philological processes
> necessary to do the markup, while "text markup" rather refers to the
> more technical aspects and is just a part of text encoding.
> Another point makes this question even more complicated: I am
> writing this article for a German lexicon and I have the impression
> that in German the relation of "Textkodierung" and
> "Textauszeichnung" is just reversed, the latter being the more
> abstract concept.
>
> Could you please tell me how you would think a prototypical use of
> "text encoding" and "text markup" (to mix two ways of researching
> word semantics) should look like if you go by your intuition. As
> these concepts are quite young, our intuition can only be quite
> weak, and every response is very welcome. To the many German
> readers on this list: Do you think my understanding of the German
> concepts meets yours?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance,
>
> Fotis Jannidis
>
> ________________________________________
> Forum Computerphilologie
> http://computerphilologie.uni-muenchen.de
>
--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 10:48:01 +0100
From: erose@Princeton.EDU
Subject: Re: 14.0352 funding (NSF/NEH/NEA -- U.S.)
Re: "Indexing Handwritten Manuscripts"
Just out of curiosity, are there manuscripts other than handwritten ones?
-E. Rose
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 10/15/00 EDT