Thanks for your encouraging words. Sorry I didn't see what you had in
mind when you said "ugly".
I tend to think in EAD 1.0 most of the time. I admit that dao |
daogrp has only one mixed content element parent: archref.
So, thanks for your tip on that score.
I think the solution that combines dao with extptr is a good one.
The issue seems to me that one would like to place information in the
source document not the stylesheet when transformation takes place. I
think it is a struggle to decide how aggressive the stylesheet should
be and how self-standing the EAD coding should be.
I really like to see the EAD source carry as much information as
possible and the stylesheet the least.
Maybe that is why I (as do others) look for ways to use the EAD tag
set to accomplish this in the document.
When I have a uniform title, I often code it as
DID/UNITTITLE/TITLE/@NORMAL and DID/NOTE/P ='Uniform title: ', so
that information will be seen whether it is grabbed by the stylesheet
Library of Congress
--- Richard Davis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Mike Ferrando wrote:
> > Finally, was the XSLT really "ugly"? I admit that I was in a
> > ('current' needed to be 'current()' and the dao template needed a
> > xsl:choose to sense the descendant::expan), but your comment
> seems to
> > carry undue criticism. ("as she spoke" ??? What does that mean?)
> Mike F!
> No criticism intended at all, it's all most ingenious! I was just
> thinking it's a shame that we must go so far round the houses for
> seems such a simple need.
> I agree that using <archref> like this doesn't fit the tag
> definition, though the DTD won't object. Perhaps tenuously, we
> it on the grounds that, for our purposes, the image itself is
> always of
> (or relating to) another object in the archive, so a combination of
> embedded image and cross-reference/hyperlink seemed to make sense.
> this is all wrong, though, fortunately, it's not something that's
> much used to-date, and changing the current markup is easily done.
> But I'm still wondering, as I think Mark is, how - if at all -
> designers expected inline images to be implemented. Such an insight
> would help me and the archivists I'm working with understand a bit
> better what we shoud be doing and why.
> \ Richard M Davis
> / Digital Archives
> \ University of London Computer Centre
> / Tel: +44 (0) 20 7692 1350
> \ mailto: [log in to unmask]
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!