-----Original Message-----
From: Murray McGillivray <mmcgilli(a)ucalgary.ca>
To: Digital Medievalist Community mailing list <dm-l(a)uleth.ca>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 10:36:24 -0600
Subject: Re: [dm-l] palaeography and computing
<snip>
The thing that would be
most helpful, actually, is a universally accepted "controlled
vocabulary" for paleographic description, either verbal or in terms of
graphical metrics (or ideally both), on which we could build descriptive
structures in XML or whatever. I don't think paleographers are close to
having that.
**********
Last year I went through the introductions to several Old English facsimiles (Vercelli Book, Hatton 20, Junius 11, Royal 7 C xii; and Ker's Catalogue - whatever was easily available at UK) in an attempt to glean such a controlled vocabulary. It was an interesting experience - paleographers seem to have different terms to describe the same forms, and I found that many terms were rather vague and only made sense when I actually saw the letter in question (ascender "rises well above the bow" or "projects slightly to the left"). And these lengthy descriptions are not always suitable as markup.
Dot
***************************************
Dorothy Carr Porter, Program Coordinator
Collaboratory for Research in Computing for Humanities
University of Kentucky
351 William T. Young Library
Lexington, KY 40506
dporter(a)uky.edu 859-257-9549
***************************************