atom feed26 messages in edu.brown.listserv.tei-lRe: signed vs. salute
FromSent OnAttachments
Torsten SchassanSep 8, 2010 3:34 am 
Paul F. SchaffnerSep 8, 2010 6:56 am 
Lou BurnardSep 8, 2010 1:42 pm 
stuart yeatesSep 8, 2010 2:45 pm 
stuart yeatesSep 8, 2010 3:51 pm 
Peter StadlerSep 9, 2010 5:00 am 
LouSep 9, 2010 5:24 am 
Peter StadlerSep 9, 2010 5:36 am 
LouSep 9, 2010 7:33 am 
Peter StadlerSep 9, 2010 7:55 am 
Martin HolmesSep 9, 2010 8:18 am 
Sebastian RahtzSep 9, 2010 12:03 pm 
Dot PorterSep 9, 2010 12:52 pm 
Martin HolmesSep 9, 2010 1:18 pm 
Martin HolmesSep 9, 2010 1:20 pm 
Sebastian RahtzSep 9, 2010 1:41 pm 
stuart yeatesSep 9, 2010 2:01 pm 
Sebastian RahtzSep 9, 2010 2:29 pm 
stuart yeatesSep 9, 2010 2:35 pm 
Martin HolmesSep 9, 2010 2:49 pm 
Sebastian RahtzSep 9, 2010 2:52 pm 
Martin HolmesSep 9, 2010 3:58 pm 
Torsten SchassanSep 10, 2010 1:05 am 
Veit (Weber-Gesamtausgabe)Sep 10, 2010 8:55 am 
Veit (Weber-Gesamtausgabe)Sep 10, 2010 12:22 pm 
Paul F. SchaffnerSep 10, 2010 1:34 pm 
Subject:Re: signed vs. salute
From:Paul F. Schaffner (pfs-@UMICH.EDU)
Date:Sep 10, 2010 1:34:04 pm

Yes, both <signed> and <salute> are defined as a "salutation". That is the nub of the problem. Nothing in the definition of <signed> suggests that it serves only to contain the designation (name and titles) of the signatory person(s). We prefer to interpret the definition 'closing salutation' as meaning that <signed> should contain the entire 'signatory statement,' or claim of responsibility (as opposed to an attribution of responsibility, which belongs to <byline>, another issue!).

I think there were a few factors (aside from the 'canonical' example, i.e. the one actually given in the element definition of <signed>) that led to our interpretation of <signed> as a container for all the 'yours truly' sort of phrases (to my mind, 'signing phrases,' not 'greeting phrases'). The most important was perhaps that in writing instructions for data-conversion firms, I could find no tenable rule by which to tell them to distinguish between many grammatically and semantically similar constructions, as splitting them between <signed> and <salute> seemed to require. E.g.:

(1) Everyone agrees (I think) that the first three examples below belong entirely in <signed>. But I could see no essential difference between those and the fourth and fifth examples, which some would divide between <signed> and <salute>:


#2 <CLOSER> <SIGNED>John, lieutenant of the Tower</SIGNED> </CLOSER>

#3 <CLOSER> <SIGNED>John, lieutenant of the Tower and servant of God</SIGNED> </CLOSER>

#4 <CLOSER> <SIGNED>John, lieutenant, etc., and your obedient servant</SIGNED> </CLOSER>

#5 <CLOSER> <SIGNED>Your obedient servant, John, lieutenant of the Tower.</SIGNED> </CLOSER>

(2) Likewise, I could see no essential difference between phrases, all descriptive of the signatory, that happened to refer to the addressee and those that did not. I gather that some would put the former (#2 below) in <salute> but not the latter (#1 below). Nor could I see what to do--or how to tell my keyers what to do--when both kinds of phrases were combined (#3 below).

#1 <CLOSER> <SIGNED>A Public Servant</SIGNED> </CLOSER>

#2 <CLOSER> <SIGNED>Your obedient Servant</SIGNED> </CLOSER>

#3 <CLOSER> <SIGNED>A Friend to Humanity and to your Welfare</SIGNED> </CLOSER>

-- Someone in this thread suggested that every <signed> must contain a name (or at least a nom de plume). We tag many abbreviated ones that do not, usu.of the form <signed>Yours truly, &c.</signed> Surely this falls under the definition of <signed> as 'a closing salutation'!

-- Below is a random and generous selection of <signed> tags (and a few <salute>s) from the 5,546 found in my current review batch. Tag them as you will! See how much variety, or unanimity, arises (n.b., you will see that we allow <list> within <signed>, a local customization.)


Samples =======

<SIGNED>Jeremiah Rich.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Yours (desirous particularly to be engaged yours to serve you,) <HI>JOHN LILBURN.</HI></SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Your assured loving friend and servant, EDWARD WOLBY.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED>A Faithfull Servant to all Lovers of <HI>Musick,</HI> JOHN PLAYFORD.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED><HI>Your Lordship</HI>'s <HI>most Faithful and most Obedient Servant,</HI> Stephen Willoughby.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Your servant till Death. <HI>Captaine</HI> John Williams.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED>From a Sufferer for the Truth and Righteousness sake, known to many of you by the Name of <HI>Isabel Wails.</HI> </SIGNED>

<SIGNED><HI>Jo. Radford</HI> Foreman of the Mineral Grand Jury there, with his fellows. <LIST> <ITEM><HI>Walter Webb.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Richard Franke.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Richard Adams.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Jahn Phelps.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Thomas Younge.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>William Dowling.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Alexandor Cuer.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>William Hopkins.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Jonas Lexstond.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>John House.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Richard Ayrer.</HI></ITEM> </LIST></SIGNED>

<SIGNED>A True Lover of his Countries Honour, <HI>W. W.</HI> </SIGNED>

<SIGNED><HI>Your most affectionately devoted Brethren in Christ,</HI> <LIST> <ITEM>Commissioners of the Church of <HI>Scotland.</HI> <LIST> <ITEM><HI>Jo. Maitland,</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>A. Jhonston,</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Alex. Henderson,</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Sam. Rutherfurd,</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Rob. Bailyie.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Geo. Gillespie.</HI></ITEM> </LIST> </ITEM> <ITEM><HI>William Twisse,</HI> Prolocutor,</ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Cornel. Burges,</HI> Assessor,</ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Jo. White,</HI> Assessor,</ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Henry Robrough,</HI> Scribe,</ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Adoniram Byfield,</HI> Scribe.</ITEM> </LIST></SIGNED>

<SIGNED>H. Elsynge, Cler. Parl. D. Com.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Wholly and intirely your most affectionate Kinsman and humble servant. <HI>F. W.</HI></SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Thy most Affectionate and Faithful Husband, and their most loving Father, <HI>J. H.</HI></SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Thy souls well-wisher, <HI>Richard Kentish.</HI></SIGNED>

<SIGNED><LIST> <ITEM><HI>Adam Samuel Hartman,</HI> Pastor of the Church of <HI>Lesna</HI> in <HI>Poland,</HI> and Rector of the famous University there.</ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Paul Cyril</HI> a late Member of the Univer&s;ity of <HI>Ly&s;na.</HI></ITEM></LIST></SIGNED>

<SALUTE>SIR,</SALUTE> <SIGNED>An Admirer of your indefatigable industry and rare abilities, JOHN TRAPP.</SIGNED>

<DATELINE>Written in the true fear of the Lord,</DATELINE> <SIGNED>by me his Servant, Anthony Tompkins.</SIGNED> <DATELINE><DATE>The 2d day of the 11th Moneth, 68.</DATE></DATELINE>

<SIGNED>Yours, The Inhabitants of the County of Rutland.</SIGNED>

<DATELINE>Written in <HI>York</HI> Castle,</DATELINE> <SIGNED>by your dear Brother, and lover of your souls, known unto you by the name of <HI>Samuel Thornton.</HI></SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Your Maiesties faithfull Subiects and Servants. <LIST> <ITEM>Earle <HI>Lothian.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM>Earle <HI>Lindesay.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM>Lord <HI>Balmerino.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM>Sir <HI>Thomas Morton.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM>Sir <HI>Thomas Hope.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM>Sir <HI>Archibauld Johnston</HI></ITEM> <ITEM>Burgesses.</ITEM> <ITEM>Sir <HI>Iohn Smith.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM>Master <HI>Robert Barklay.</HI></ITEM> <ITEM>Master <HI>Patrick Bell.</HI></ITEM> </LIST></SIGNED>


<SALUTE>Adieu Madam.</SALUTE>

<SIGNED>Your Servant, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></SIGNED>


<SIGNED>Your sorrowfull friend, and brother in Christ, <HI>Thomas Sweet.</HI></SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Your Worships affectionate Kinsman and Servant.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Your Lordship's Most Passionate Admirer And Most Devoted Humble Servant.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Your true friend and Cosen, <HI>Nathanael Warters.</HI></SIGNED>

<SIGNED>We subscribe our selves, Your Brethren in the Faith and Fellowship of the Gospel, <LIST> <ITEM><HI>William Kiffin,</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>George Barrett,</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Robert Steed,</HI></ITEM> <ITEM><HI>Edward Man.</HI></ITEM> </LIST></SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Thine to serve thee for the Publike good, G. A.</SIGNED>

<SALUTE>>MY LORD!</SALUTE> <SIGNED>Your <HI>Highness,</HI> though unknown, yet most humble servant.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED><HI>From thy Friend, and all Peoples, In Sincerity and Truth,</HI> Thomas Rudd.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED><HI>one</HI> of the meanest of Your Servants for Christ, and this Commonwealth. <HI>JO. ROGERS.</HI></SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Your affectionate fellow Apprentices of Bridge Ward within.</SIGNED> <DATELINE><HI>Dated</HI> <DATE>the 17 <HI>of</HI> May, 1649. <HI>the first year of Englands hopeful Restauration, through the blessing of God, to its primitive Liberty.</HI></DATE></DATELINE>

<SALUTE>My Lord, </SALUTE> <SIGNED><HI>Your Most Humble and Most Obedient Servants, the Agents General of the Clergy of</HI> France. <HI>The Abbot</HI> de VILLARS. <HI>The Abbot</HI> PHILYPEA&V;X.</SIGNED> <DATELINE><HI>Paris</HI> <DATE>this <HI>2d. of</HI> October, <HI>1688.</HI></DATE></DATELINE>

<SIGNED>By the Contriver of the Citizens Protestation, here following.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED><HI>Yours unfeignedly, in the right way of the Gospel to serve you faithfully, according to my measure in the things of Jesus Christ,</HI> THO: LAMBE.</SIGNED>

<SALUTE>(SIR,)</SALUTE> <SIGNED>Your most affectionate Friend, heartily to serve you [being yet as much an English man as ever I was] <HI>JOHN LILBURN, Semper idem</HI></SIGNED> <DATELINE>From my delightfull dwelling in Bruges, <DATE>Saturday, Novemb. the 9. 1652. New stile.</DATE></DATELINE> <TRAILER>The End.</TRAILER>

<SIGNED><HI>I subscribe myself Your Fellow-Citizen,</HI> A FRIEND TO HUMANITY.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Your servant, S--l C--h, forever.</SIGNED>


<SIGNED>WM. GIBBONS, <HI>President and Delegate from Chatham.</HI> </SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Thomas Gozaeus a Bellomonte, sacrae Theologiae Professor, &amp; authoritate Pontificis librorum approbator.</SIGNED>

<SIGNED>Your Honours obliged servant though unworthiest among the Ministers of Christ. <HI>THO. MARRIOT.</HI></SIGNED>


On Fri, 10 Sep 2010, Veit (Weber-Gesamtausgabe) wrote:

Hi Torsten, thanks a lot for this summary of the discussion - but from my point of view I would not fully consent: 1. ok: <salute/> and <signed/> should be "wrapped in"-elements 2. also ok! But if your text is the "greeting expression" I would argue that:

<closer> <salute>I am your most humble servant</salute> <signed>Joseph Wanton Jr</signed> </closer>

is much clearer than:

<signed>Thine to command <name type="person">Humph. Moseley</name> </signed>

because "Thine to command" is a typical greeting formula, not a part of a "signed" (and even if some persons use the "humble servant" as part of the "signing formula" I would prefer to split these things up). If you want to specify the name of the person I would use:

<closer> <salute>I am your most humble servant</salute> <signed><persName key="xxxx"/>Joseph Wanton Jr</persName></signed> </closer>

or <closer> <salute>I am your most humble servant</salute> <signed><name type="person" key="xxxx"/>Joseph Wanton Jr</name></signed> </closer>

But the definition on the TEI-page confirms your version because it says that<signed> contains "the closing salutation" - but that's strange, because what is<salute> if it is not a "salutation"? or which is the place to split off a salutation in "beginning" and "final"? And in that case you would need something like <closer> <p>Please give many greetings to all your friends and stay convinced that</p> <salute>I am your most humble servant</salute> <signed>....</signed> </closer>

- and that would be wrong because<p> is not allowed within the closer-element!

So perhaps the definitions need to be more explicit??

I regret if that doesn't help to solve the question... Yours, Joachim

Am 10.09.10 10:05, schrieb Torsten Schassan:



don't see any need for a new attribute. @rend allows CSS values; @rendition encourages CSS values. And both allow for other values for things that cannot be expressed using CSS.

I very much second John's argument especially as I think about further problems defining *which* version of css the @tei:css will represent or would we need @tei:css2, @tei:css21, and @tei:css3?

If I tried to summarize the original discussion would we agree on

1.<salute> and<signed> especially when they appear together should be wrapped in<opener>/<closer>;

2.<salute> contains text that addresses another person respectively the greeting expression while<signed> represents the writing person;

3. if (2.) is valid, the use of<name> inside<signed> would be very much recommended?

The *quintessential* examples would be for<signed>

<signed>Thine to command <name type="person">Humph. Moseley</name> </signed>


<closer> <signed>I am your most humble servant <name>Joseph Wanton Jr</name> </signed> </closer>

rather than

<closer> <salute>I am your most humble servant</salute> <signed>Joseph Wanton Jr</signed> </closer>


<closer> <salute>Dear sir,</salute> <signed>your most obedient servant, <name>J. Smith</name> </signed> </closer>

Any objections (especially from the Correspondence SIG) to that summary? Would that qualify for a SourceForge ticket?

Best, Torsten

- -- Torsten Schassan Digitale Editionen Abteilung Handschriften und Sondersammlungen Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel Tel.: +49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165), schassan {at} -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -

iD8DBQFMiea6q4nZEP2KS4QRAg5gAJ4ij51wgUog6PfpddWlqMICzgW0gACghuWV GzViZWcQFdd+YwOGS7VDK2Y= =tXvJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Schaffner | | 316-C Hatcher Library N, Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI 48109-1190