Consolidated Emails September-October Regarding References
Posted by lauren on 14 Oct 2009 in Academic
Hello everyone, I have decided to summarize our decisions regarding citations and mark-up on the blog for easy reference. Please feel free to let me know if anything needs to be updated, as it likely will.
- When working with Saints, Anges, etc: The header should be as follows: Saint Autel. The XML id, however, needs to have the proper name before the Saint (e.g. autelSaint instead of saintAutel).
- Mholmes: "Duplicated the Pyrame entry to create a separate Thisbe entry next to it; someone will need to write the two entries to be complementary, and make sure any ref tags point at the appropriate one."
- ccarlin: in agreement with parentheses () and with the foreign tag for headings (no need for an italic attribute as Martin has fixed the XSLT so that all foreign is rendered italic. Here's my template (based off lspwong's beautiful entry):
<head>Alcmène en gr. (<foreign xml:lang="gr">Alkmênê</foreign>)</head>
- ccarlin: "I really don’t think a paraphrase absolves one of accusations of plagiarism unless more than one source is being amalgamated. I suggest a word limit for direct quotations from the Robert Illustré — that is the most clear and honest path, especially if it’s within limits. How about (I suggest arbitrarily) 250 words? It is perfectly OK to take all of the Robert’s reference, with attribution, if it’s not enormous."
- I note that the “Grand Robert en ligne” gives the following definition of “nippe”: Objet servant à l'ajustement et à la parure, « comme hardes, linges, bagues et autres pareilles choses » (Richelet, 1680). Richelet is one of the 17th-century dictionaries we have in the departmental library; I’m sure the word is in Furetière, and probably the Dico de l’Académie too. In an instance where the Robert is citing a 17th-century dictionary, then I think it makes sense for us to give a 17th-century dictionary citation. (Remember that the wonderful Furetière dictionary is now on Gallica.)
- ccarlin: (for my work on the Agremens) “Écu” is another interesting example, in that its meaning depends on the 17th-century context. How much was an “écu” worth? Please consult me in such instances, since I can sometimes quickly come up with information, and other times, with a bit of work. I thought I had a link to a site discussing monetary values, but all I have is a long discussion thread about the complexity of equivalencies, this from the H-France discussion group. Bottom line for our site: additional contextual information, going beyond mere definition, makes this kind of reference particularly worthwhile.
- ccarlin: "Please use Wikipedia judiciously. A brief direct quotation from the Robert for identification purposes is fine. Taking into account the context (how much information is necessary), use of a variety of sources is a good idea, but don’t give up completely on brief verbatim quotations, as I said in my opening paragraph."
