Mariage

So going off the Laval bibliographic citation page that Claire gave us, my citations of the Petit Robert are formatted like this:

<bibl><title level = "a">Plessis-les-Tours</title>, <title level="m">Le Petit Robert : Dictionnaire illustré des noms propres</title> (septembre 1994), Paris, Dictionnaires le Robert, p. 1700.</bibl>

I have also begun using the quote and cit tags as suggested by MH to LSPW:

<p><cit><quote>quoted material!</quote></cit></p>

Link: http://www.lexilogos.com/francais_langue_dictionnaires.htm

The "lexilogos" site is very cool -- many dictionaries in French (including a link to the Furetière on Gallica. It really is the most interesting 17th-c. dictionary).

As for the question of repeated references to the same word, I think it is a good idea, given that readers may enter the text at different points as the result of a search. But (Martin) can this be done automatically? I take it Emily was inserting each reference manually.

Toujours des points intéressants!

At CC's request, changed "Complet" to "Tous les documents".

There were some technical difficulties today which did not allow me to connect to the server and do any editing of the 1621 sonnet. Instead, MH suggested that I compare the 1621 to the 1609 on the Mariage site to find any inconsistencies between the two. I found the following:

1) For some reason, the wallpaper with the 17th century motif that you find in the 1621 does not appear in the 1609. There's only a boring gray background in the 1609.

2) In the 1621, notes 1 and 2 only appear at the end of the document and not within the text. However, in the 1609, notes 1 to 4 appear not only at the end of the document but also within the text where you can click on each number that links to a pop-up window displaying the note.

3) This is more a question pertaining to the references rather than an inconsistency...I've noticed that in the 1621 Emily included a reference tag for each time the same word appears throughout the entire text. For instance, she encoded the word "Hymen" with ref tags every time it appeared in the text. Do we want to do this for all ref words that occur more than once or should we just encode the word the first time it appears and leave the rest?

Link: http://recherche.univ-lyon2.fr/grac

Just a little report on the "mariage" conference in Lyon. Many interesting 16th-century texts were discussed, which is helpful for context even if we don't put any of them on the site. The really cool item is that the proceedings are going to be put on line, and we can include the link in the general bibliography. There was also one paper in particular on the character of Chrysalde in "L'École des femmes," whom I mention in one of the papers we're planning to have on the site in the next while, so I can suggest a link from my comments to this specific paper.

I've put the URL of the research centre (Groupe Renaissance et Âge Classique) where the articles will be posted.

Thanks to all of you for the continuing solid work.

I have begun to go through the reference file, where I think some of the references can be trimmed to make them more focused to the context at hand. This will take me a while as I'm away from the computer on and off until October 14, but the process has begun.

In general, if information is being taken from a source (Robert Illustré or Universalis, etc), the important thing is to acknowledge that source (or those sources) whether quoting directly with quote tags, or paraphrasing. A combination of sources may be desirable when tailoring the reference to the context. As you develop experience with the corpus, this will be easier to do, but in any case, I will continue to monitor the reference file.

Here we go with my list.

1. Proof the last 40 pages of Varin. Tiny alterations probably still needed for how the text is showing up on the website (e.g. linebreaks, etc. to add).
2. Candale: write the references. Get a consensus on how best to write the references (am I now directly quoting from the Petit Robert or am I still to paraphrase while carefully changing vocab so as not to plagiarize?
3. Agreemens: proof both volumes, add a note at the end of the second volume saying that the third and four are missing.
4. Agreemens: references.
5. Isembourg: references.
6. References: overhaul, put MY references in some kind of intelligible order to make working with them easier, make everything cohesive.

As I was checking the references for which I did include quote tags (ex. aconit, nappelle, spermatique, etc.), I found no quotation marks around the text. MH showed me how to fix this by surrounding the quote tags with cit tags. For example:

<p><cit><quote>s. m. Espece de plante veneneuse.</quote></cit></p>

This should now surround the text with the French guillemets.

MH also suggested that I use title tags to distinguish the title of the article and the title of the source. Ex.

<bibl><title level = "a">Aconit</title>, <title level="m">Dictionnaire de l'Académie française en ligne</title> (1694), The ARTFL Project, Department of Romance Languages and Literatures, University of Chicago, Internet, 24 août 2009.</bibl>

Title level = a should enclose the text in guillemets and title level = m should render the title of the source to italic font.

1)I have finished finding definitions for all the medical references, or at least the ones that Emily had noted in the references.xml, as well as proofread my work. MH will upload it to the server and onto the website. I'll add more medical references if I see any others that Emily may have missed.

2) My next task will be to edit sonnet 1621 in a which is consistent with that of the 1609. I will also be checking to make sure that the reference links work. So far, I have added "letter-spacing: 0.2em" where applicable and changed the font-size to more closely portray the size of the font as represented in the facsimile. For the same reason, I have also rendered the font of the entire text (excluding the title page) to italic font like I did in the 1609.