Source: email
Date: 2002-05-22
File name: Wd1858.apex.sgm
Keywords: DIV type, author, bibliography
The front matter contained a list of authors cited in the book. I called this div TYPE="bibliography" though it didn't refer to many books.
PFS:changed to: TYPE="list of authors"
Source: email
Date: 2003-04-15
File name: apex/S13462
Keywords: DIV type
Unsure what to call list of passages of scripture in the front matter. Settled for DIV TYPE="scripture references">
PFS: how about "index of scriptural passages"?
Source: email
Date: 2003-10-09
File name: apex/S13797
Keywords: DIV type, envoy
My Div type for this poem is "author to book", which doesn't seem to be ideal.
PFS: how would you feel about TYPE="envoy"?
Source: email
Date: 2004-01-09
File name: apex/Wr1956
Keywords: DIV type
The last division of this text is "a register for the help of a bookbinder" and I called it register (which the OED defines as "The series of signatures in a printed book; the list of these at the end of early printed books"), even though this might not be what one would now expect by the term.
PFS: 'register of quires' ? ('information for binder' ????)
Source: email
Date: 2004-02-18
File name: apex/Wg122
Keywords: DIV type
I have called the final div "quoted remarks on the author", as I couldn't think of anything more succinct. I thought about "approbation", but it isn't really one of those.
PFS: "excerpt from review"? "excerpted review"? I also thought perhaps the citation attached to the quoted excerpt could go in BIBL tags, viz.: <BIBL><HI>Observator</HI> Vol. 7. Numb. 24. <HI>Saturday June</HI> 30. 1694.<BIBL>
Source: email
Date: 2004-03-24
File name: apex/S13000
Keywords: DIV type
Div types - wasn't sure whether to have part or king or norman king, or norman king of England. Went for King.
PFS: I like king. In longer histories, we've sometimes settled on 'reign' or 'sovereign' as more general.
Source: email
Date: 2004-04-26
File name: apex/Wv250b
Keywords: DIV type
I called the final div (a testimony to the truth of the text) authentication. I think we've had these before, but I couldn't remember what we called them.
PFS: I'm not sure I remember anything quite like this, which is not simply an 'approbation' (approval) of the value and dogmatic correctness of a piece, but a sworn confirmation or corroboration by witnesses of the literal truth of an account. "confirmation"? "corroboration"?
Source: email
Date: 2004-11-05
File name: apex/S18475
Keywords: DIV type, Q
Apex included this 'problem statement':
1. Problem Statement : <Q> Observed before the division closing.
Treatment: <Q> Placed before the <TRAILER>
File name: S18475.SGM
Context in File
===============
<Q>¶ En passant le temps sans mal peucer.</Q>
<TRAILER>¶ Finit prologus</TRAILER>
On the file's arrival pfs responded to this problem statement thus:
this looks like a good time to use EPIGRAPH and put it back after the TRAILER where it started. On the face of it anyway.
Emma comments:
"En passant le temps sans mal pencer" occurs again at the end, and may be a reference to "Honny soit qui mal y pense" which is quoted in the royal ballad. I've put both "En passant" quotes in <EPIGRAPH> tags, although was unsure if this was really the best way to tag them.
PFS: not sure either, but it works. I was a little undecided about the 'type' of the odd thing at the beginning which is headed printer to author, but is in effect a prologue in the form of a dialogue between author and printer. I opted in the end for the simple 'prologue' since that is what the trailer calls it ('finit prologus') and also what the modern editor calls it.
Emma: There is another line of french "¶ Uolunte ie ay mais ie ne veulx mon cuer chaunger." which I've tagged in <EPIGRAPH> tags as well for consistency. It occurs just before the final div2 in the Body, which is headed envoi, but which I have called conclusion, as it isn't an envoi in the usual sense.
PFS: I think there are several usual senses, and this falls under one of them: a concluding stanza or group of stanzas in which the author says farewell to his poem as he launches it out into a sea of critics.... So I think 'envoy' is ok. (though the usual American spelling is envoi, just to complicate things).
Emma: There are a series of verses in french and english at the end. Although two are headed envoi, they aren't envoi in the usual sense, and I wasn't sure what to do with them.
¶ Lenuoy de Robert Coplande lymprimeur. is an apology to the author for not printing everything correctly.[ div type printer to author]
¶ Ballade royalle. is praising king Henry [div type dedication]
¶ R. Coplande to thauctour. is apologising for printing the printer's bad French verses without permission. [div type printer to author]
PFS: I fudged the matter a little by lumping together all three additions by Copland under a DIV1 TYPE="printer's additions", since I think this distinction (between author's text and printer's additions) is the most important one, structurally speaking; then made the three poems <DIV2 TYPE="xx poem" where xx = 'dedicatory' or 'apologetic'. This allowed me to interpret the 'quod Copland' as the signature of all three pieces, thus:
</DIV2>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>¶ Quod Coplande.</SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
BTW, it is a little curious that Copland appears as the 'printer,' but the colophon says that the book was printed by Wynkyn de Worde, to whom Copland was previously assistant. The modern editor suggests that Copland acted as editor and publisher, but handed the book over to his old master de Worde for the actual printing.
Source: email
Date: 2003-05-01
File name: pdcc/S7108
Keywords: DIV type, license, imprimatur
The following un-typed DIV occurred at the end of the text:
<P>Mandetur-typis haec Concio, cui Titulus An Apostoli|call Injunction for Vnity and Peace.</P>
<CLOSER><DATELINE>Ex adibus Fulham.
dei <DATE>August. <HI>8. 1639.</HI></DATE></DATELINE>
<SIGNED><HI>Sa. Baker.</HI></SIGNED></CLOSER>
Is this an imprimatur or license?
PFS: I think we've been reserving 'imprimatur' for ecclesiastical licenses. Fulham palace is the seat of the Bishop of London, but I don't know who Samuel Baker is--not, I think, the Bishop. Maybe a secretary? Sa. Baker signs three other licenses in the books so far, all of them explicitly saying "imprimatur." So between that and the Fulham dateline, I'd go with imprimatur. The 'dei' worries me; I think it must be a mistake for 'diei' (?) ('day'), and therefore part of the <DATE>.
Source: email
Date: 2004-05-13
File name: pdcc/Wm166
Keywords: DIV type
The sections of the text which were headed title 1, title 2 etc. I called type="section", because they were titles of sections of text, and I didn't think a 'title' should refer to a section of text. I wasn't sure though.
PFS: Don't know where else, but 'title' is used to refer to sections of legal documents nowadays, at least in the US ("U.S. Code Annotated, Title 17, Paragraph 4"), in very much the same kind of context as in our book. So perhaps we can allow it here? (USCA Title 17 covers copyright, by the way.)
Source: email
Date: 10/08/04
File name: Ww3622.pdcc
Keywords: DIV type
Changed "list" to "advertisements" etc.
PFS: changed to TYPE="publisher's advertisement" which is what we've been using for all lists of books for sale, whether attached to the name of the printer, the 'publisher,' the bookseller, or without any explicit attachment.
Source: email
Date: 11-30-04
File name: pdcc/wf10
Keywords: DIV type
Reviewed structure; changed "masque" to "testimonial"
PFS: for blurbs at the beginning from various authors testifying to their respect for the author of the present work
<DIV2 TYPE="testimonial">
<BYLINE>Dr. <HI>Fuller</HI>.</BYLINE>
<P>Amongst the Modern Worthies of this Colledge still surviving,
Dr. <HI>Robert Sanderson</HI>, late Regius Professor, moveth in
the high|est Sphere, a no less <HI>plain</HI> and <HI>profitable</HI>
then <HI>able</HI> and <HI>profound</HI> Ca|suist, (a Learning almost
lost amongst Protestants.)</P>
</DIV2>
Source: email
Date: 2003-07-11
File name: tech/S5138
Keywords: DIV type
Used DIV TYPE="endorsement" for a series of paragraphs stating that the text did not run counter to the Protestant faith (I think - passages are in latin).
PFS: 'endorsement' is good (wish I'd thought of it)--but I think I've been using the strange term 'approbation' (i.e. 'approval') for these, mostly because some of the ones I've seen have had latin headings 'approbationes' IN this case, the first one at least comes pretty close to an imprimatur ('mandetur typis' = 'imprimatur'). The others just say that they've read through the book and find nothing objectionable to Anglicans in it, so they're true approbations/endorsements.
Source: email
Date: 2004-02-23
File name: tech/Ws4417ad
Keywords: DIV type, verse
At the end of the text there are 2 short verses in Latin and English. I haven't made these epigraphs as they seem to be by the author: the English reads:
<L>Farewel small Book, to undergo</L>
<L>Both Criticisms and hate:</L>
<L>A Fortune worse thou scarce canst know,</L>
<L>Than's been thy Master's Fate.</L>
I have put them inside trailers, mainly because TRAILER allows L within it.
PFS: One could do worse, but I think this is a little better:
<BACK>
<DIV1 TYPE="envoy">
<LG>
<L>Iudicium varium subiture Libelle valeto,</L>
<L>Sorte tui Domini non tua pejor erit.</L>
</LG>
<LG>
<L>Farewel small Book, to undergo</L>
<L>Both Criticisms and hate:</L>
<L>A Fortune worse thou scarce canst know,</L>
<L>Than's been thy Master's Fate.</L>
</LG>
</DIV1>
--i.e. moving them into BACK and given a DIV TYPE="envoy" of their own; 'envoy' in the sense of: "The action of sending forth a poem; hence, the concluding part of a poetical or prose composition..." (OED2).
Source: notes file
Date: 2005-01-19
File name: apex/Ww1947a, Ww1895a
Keywords: DIV type
Title appears afterwards, and looks original to the document, so I have included it, with a div type="title". Jonathan had a similar text Ww1895a, and he assumed the title was a later addition, so deleted it, but now on reflection thinks he should have left it in.
PFS: these are unusual titles in that they are printed sideways (vertically)
on an otherwise blank verso (the verso of a broadside in the one
case, the verso of the second leaf of a bifolium pamphlet in
Jonathan's case. According to the rare-book cataloguers at Brown
and at the Folger who replied to my query on the Exlibris list,
the term of art for these is 'docket title'.
I have therefore restored the title in Jonathan's book, placed
both docket titles (in Ww1895a and Ww1947a) into DIV1s in BACK,
and called them TYPE="docket title".
Source: notes file
Date: 2005-02-21
File name: pdcc/Wm747
Keywords: DIV type
I have called the div pasted in below an attestation - another term might be better?
<DIV1 TYPE="attestation">
<PB REF="2">
<PB REF="2">
<P>_BEcause it is usual to abuse Readers in thrusting forth
broken Notes under the Names of Authors that are of Re|pute:
These are to Attest the follo|wing fifty <HI>Sermons</HI> on several
Texts; Were Preached by M^R <HI>Stephen Marshall;</HI> And are now
Published by the most perfect Coppy.</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>
<LIST>
<ITEM><HI>Ralph Venning.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Thomas Lye.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Thomas Jacomb.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST></SIGNED>
</CLOSER>
</DIV1>
PFS: more general ("notice"?); more specific? ("guarantee of authenticity"?)
Source: email
Date: 2004-10-22
Keywords: DIV type
A reminder: to distinguish the various things that can be called 'advertisements,' I've been using these div TYPES:
Source: notes file
Date: 2003-05
file name Apex/Wt3064
Keywords: DIV type
I've used "mittimus" as a DIV Type. Is that OK or should I choose something simpler, like document?
PFS: On the one hand, 'mittimus' is what it is called in the book, and is an entirely legitimate term; on the other, it might be thought obscure enough to cause confusion as to what is being inserted. Since a 'mittimus' is a kind of writ, I think I might expand the TYPE a little and say TYPE="writ of mittimus" or TYPE="mittimus writ" if I was interested in specifying the type most usefully.
This is in general. Within this book, there is probably little need to be very specific, either with this document or with the other insertions, since they mostly have very specific heads that make it very clear what they are: <HEAD>Mittimus</HEAD> <HEAD>Examination and Confession</HEAD> etc. Since specificity would duplicate the info in the HEADs, you could get away with DOCUMENT if you like, which I see is what you used for the others anyway (as opposed to, say, TYPE="examination" or TYPE="deposition").
Source: email
Date: 17 Feb 2004
Keywords:
DIV type, foreign-language version
I changed:
<DIV1 TYPE="dialogue" N="1">
<DIV2 TYPE="English dialogue">
<DIV2 TYPE="Malayan dialogue">
and
<DIV1 TYPE="dialogue">
<DIV2 TYPE="English dialogue">
<DIV2 TYPE="Madagascan dialogue">
to
<DIV1 TYPE="dialogue" N="1">
<DIV2 TYPE="version" LANG="eng">
<DIV2 TYPE="version" LANG="may">
and
<DIV1 TYPE="dialogue">
<DIV2 TYPE="version" LANG="eng">
<DIV2 TYPE="version" LANG="mlg">
Also made whole text <TEXT LANG="eng may mlg"> since bulk of text is made up of these dialogues systematically arranged.
Source: email
Date: 22 Oct 2004
Keywords:
DIV type, index, table of contents
TYPE="index" and TYPE="table of contents" are two of our commonest TYPEs, but I've noticed them used a few times misleadingly. Bear in mind that a table of contents (a list of contents in contents order) should be called TYPE="table of contents" even if its heading is <HEAD>Index to Contents</HEAD>; and that an index (an alphabetical arrangement of the contents) should be called TYPE="index" even if it is headed <HEAD>Table of Contents</HEAD>!
We've been a little less consistent when tagging elaborated tables of contents, with types like TYPE="analysis of contents" TYPE="summary of contents" and TYPE="summary of contents" among others.
Source: email
Date: 29 Jul 2004
Keywords:
DIV type, DIV n
I've been inclined in some cases to shift information recorded in the TYPE attribute into the N attribute instead. This easiest in cases like this:
TYPE="chapter 7" --> TYPE="chapter" N="7"
but I've also done it in slighly more dubious cases, where one has to supply a generic name for the thing in question, e.g.:
TYPE="Genesis" --> TYPE="book" N="Genesis"
TYPE="Exodus" --> TYPE="book" N="Exodus"
[in publisher's book list:]
TYPE="folio" --> TYPE="size" N="folio"
TYPE="octavo" --> TYPE="size" N="octavo"
TYPE="quarto" --> TYPE="size" N="quarto"
[Here I toyed with 'format' rather than 'size' (since that is technically what it is), but thought 'size' closer to the commonsensical view of what the distinction meant.]
I also removed some information from lower-level div typess when it was implied by the superordinate div type. E.g.:
<DIV1 TYPE="exegesis of ten commandments">
<DIV2 TYPE="exegesis of first commandment">
became -->
<DIV1 TYPE="exegesis of ten commandments">
<DIV2 TYPE="commandment" N="1">
or even
--> <DIV1 TYPE="exegesis">
<DIV2 TYPE="ten commandments">
<DIV3 TYPE="commandment" N="1">
and
<DIV1 TYPE="treatise on the sacraments">
<DIV2 TYPE="exegetical discourse on baptism">
-->
<DIV1 TYPE="treatise on the sacraments">
<DIV2 TYPE="sacrament" N="baptism">
And in a few cases I changed the type from what I thought was incidental in distinguishing one part from another to what I thought was essential, e.g.:
<DIV3 TYPE="faults"><HEAD>Faults of the church of Rome</HEAD>
<DIV3 TYPE="corruptions"><HEAD>Corruptions of the church of Ephesus</HEAD>
<DIV3 TYPE="faults"><HEAD>Faults of the church of Galatia</HEAD>
became --->
<DIV3 TYPE="faults of the churches">
<DIV4 TYPE="church" N="Rome">
<DIV4 TYPE="church" N="Ephesus">
<DIV4 TYPE="church" N="Galatia">