Kim Brookes wrote:

> So, the level of <c> doesn't tell us much about where something is,
> across hierarchies, only within hierarchies.  The numbered <c>s are a
> handy aid to the marker-upper in that they indicate which <c> you're
> actually in.  But other than that, I find them misleading and prefer
> to use the recursive model.  The recursive model still places each
> <c> within the hierarchical context of the <c>s above and below it.
> It just doesn't lead one to believe all <c4>s are equal.

Kim,

You've made a good point.  I like using the numbered <c>'s
because of the ease of identifying where you are, but as
you pointed out, not all <c4>'s are created equal.  Are
there any SGML tagging tricks that make it easier to know
at what level of recursion you are in when using the
recursive <c> tag (I.e. is there some tool or view in
Author/Editor and the other editing software packages that
would make it easier to tell where you are)?

I am asking because we are trying to flesh out different
scenarios of how to actually tag guides for production
purposes.  If we use relatively low-skilled employees to
tag, I just want to make sure that they would not get lost
in a logical maze.

Steven

********************************
Steven Mandeville-Gamble
Project Archivist, Dept. of Special Collections
Stanford University Libraries
Phone: (415) 725-3478    Fax: (415) 723-8690
Email: [log in to unmask]
********************************