The element claim
contains one or more claims.
Formal Definition
(~inclusion
| (~ed-stamp
?, (@cert
| (@cert
,@cert2
))?,@claimant
?,@adverb
?,@verb
?,@where
?, ( (@subject
|<subject>
+)? & (@object
| (<object>
|<claim>
+)+)? &<locus>
+? &<when>
* & (@claim-basis
|<claim-basis>
+)?)))
Used by: ~set-of-claims
, ~TAN-c-item
, ~complex-object
Caution | |
---|---|
Claims involving verbs whose object is constrained must use |
Caution | |
---|---|
Verbs that have object constraints must not be combined with other verbs in |
Caution | |
---|---|
Every |
Caution | |
---|---|
Any predefined strictures on verbs must be respected. |
The element claim-basis
points to a textual passage that serves as the rationale for why a claim was made.
Formal Definition
~ed-stamp
?, {empty}
Used by: ~rationale
Formal Definition
~ed-stamp
?, {empty}
Used by: ~claim
Example 8.207. <locus>
<TAN-A-div TAN-version="1 dev" id="tag:parkj@textalign.net,2015:ar.cat.tan-a-div:claims"> ......... <body claimant="lmp"> ......... <claim subject="andronicus boethus" adverb="perhaps" verb="omits" claim-basis="dexippus porphyry"> <locus work="grc"> <tok ref="1 a 2" pos="3-4"/> </locus> </claim> <claim subject="herminus comm-omnes" verb="agrees"> <locus work="grc"> <tok ref="1 a 2" pos="3-4"/> </locus> </claim> ......... <claim subject="B" verb="replaces"> <locus work="grc"> <tok ref="1 a 5" pos="1-2"/> </locus> <object>τις ἀποδιδῷ</object> </claim> <claim subject="Λ" adverb="perhaps" verb="replaces"> <locus work="grc"> <tok ref="1 a 5" pos="1-2"/> </locus> <object>τις ἀποδιδῷ</object> </claim> <claim subject="π α φ ο" verb="agrees"> <locus work="grc"> <tok ref="1 a 5" pos="1-2"/> </locus> </claim> </body> </TAN-A-div>
Note | |
---|---|
Taken from ar.cat.tan-a-div.claims |
The element modal
contains an IRI + name pattern identifying a modal or adverb that qualifies the verb of an assertion.
See main.xml# keywords-modal for standard vocabulary.
Formal Definition
~decl-pattern-default
Used by: ~TAN-c-decl-core
Example 8.208. <modal>
<declarations> ......... <verb xml:id="replaces" which="replaces" object-datatype="string"/> <modal which="possibly" xml:id="perhaps"/> </declarations>
Note | |
---|---|
Taken from ar.cat.tan-a-div.claims |
The element object
is similar to @object
, but for complex content, mainly concepts that do not lend themselves to the IRI + name pattern, particularly languages and units or passages of text.
Formal Definition
~ed-stamp
?, (~nontextual-reference
| {empty})
Used by: ~claim
, ~complex-object
Caution | |
---|---|
|
Caution | |
---|---|
|
Example 8.209. <object>
<TAN-A-div TAN-version="1 dev" id="tag:parkj@textalign.net,2015:ar.cat.tan-a-div:claims"> ......... <body claimant="lmp"> ......... <claim subject="B" verb="replaces"> <locus work="grc"> ......... </locus> <object>τις ἀποδιδῷ</object> </claim> <claim subject="Λ" adverb="perhaps" verb="replaces"> <locus work="grc"> ......... </locus> <object>τις ἀποδιδῷ</object> </claim> ......... </body> </TAN-A-div>
Note | |
---|---|
Taken from ar.cat.tan-a-div.claims |
The element person
contains an IRI + name pattern identifying a person. This element is very similar to <agent>
, but does not imply that the person had anything to do with the data in the TAN file.
Although person implies a single individual, this element may be applied to corporate entities, or groups of more than one person.
Formal Definition
~decl-pattern-default
Used by: ~TAN-c-decl-core
Example 8.210. <person>
<head> ......... <declarations> <person xml:id="andronicus"> <IRI>https://inpho.cogs.indiana.edu/thinker/2532</IRI> <IRI>http://dbpedia.org/resource/Andronicus_of_Rhodes</IRI> <name>Andronicus of Rhodes</name> </person> <person xml:id="boethus"> <IRI>http://dbpedia.org/resource/Boethus_of_Sidon</IRI> <name>Boethus of Sidon</name> </person> <person xml:id="dexippus"> <IRI>http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dexippus</IRI> <name>Dexippus</name> </person> <person xml:id="herminus"> <IRI>http://dbpedia.org/resource/Herminus</IRI> <name>Herminus</name> </person> <person xml:id="porphyry"> ......... </person> ......... </declarations> ......... </head>
Note | |
---|---|
Taken from ar.cat.tan-a-div.claims |
The element place
contains an IRI + name pattern identifying a spatial location, usually somewhere on earth
Formal Definition
~decl-pattern-default
Used by: ~TAN-c-decl-core
The element scriptum
contains an IRI + name pattern identifying a text-bearing object.
Formal Definition
~decl-pattern-default
Used by: ~TAN-c-decl-core
Example 8.211. <scriptum>
<head> ......... <declarations> ......... <work xml:id="Γ"> ......... </work> <scriptum xml:id="n"> <IRI>tag:parkj@textalign.net,2015:scriptum:ita:milan:ambrosianus:L-93</IRI> <name>Ambrosianus L 93</name> <desc>saec. ix</desc> </scriptum> <scriptum xml:id="B"> <IRI>tag:parkj@textalign.net,2015:scriptum:ita:venezia:marcianus:201</IRI> <name>Marcianus 201</name> <desc>saec. x</desc> </scriptum> <work xml:id="π" which="Commentarium graecum Porphyrii"/> ......... </declarations> ......... </head>
Note | |
---|---|
Taken from ar.cat.tan-a-div.claims |
The element subject
points to text references that act as the subject of the claim.
Multiple values of <subject>
are interpreted to mean "and", resulting in distribution of the claim (e.g., subject="x y" becomes "x [verby]..." and "y [verb]...").
Formal Definition
~ed-stamp
?, {empty}
Used by: ~set-of-claims
, ~other-body-attributes
, ~claim
, ~subject
The element topic
declares one or more topics, to be used in conjunction with @topic
under <align>
to associate alignments with specific topics instead of verbatim parallels.
Formal Definition
~decl-pattern-default
Used by: ~TAN-c-decl-core
The element unit
contains an IRI + name pattern identifying a unit type (e.g., millimeters, seconds, Euros), to be used in conjunction with <object>
to specify the meaning of a value
Formal Definition
~decl-pattern-default
Used by: ~TAN-c-decl-core
The element verb
contains an IRI + name pattern identifying a property, relationship, action, or something else that is used to say something about something.
The preferred term "verb" is equivalent to RDF "predicate." The latter term is avoided as misleading, since in ordinary usage the term "predicate" implies everything in a sentence that is not the subject.
Formal Definition
~object-constraint
?,~decl-pattern-default
Used by: ~set-of-claims
, ~other-body-attributes
, ~TAN-c-decl-core
, ~claim
Caution | |
---|---|
Claims involving verbs whose object is constrained must use |
Caution | |
---|---|
Verbs that have object constraints must not be combined with other verbs in |
Example 8.212. <verb>
<head> ......... <declarations> ......... <alias xml:id="comm-omnes" idrefs="π δ αd φd οd ηd σd"/> <verb xml:id="omits" which="omits"/> <verb xml:id="agrees" which="agrees"/> <verb xml:id="replaces" which="replaces" object-datatype="string"/> <modal which="possibly" xml:id="perhaps"/> </declarations> ......... </head>
Note | |
---|---|
Taken from ar.cat.tan-a-div.claims |
The attribute adverb
names a <modal>
that qualifies the claim.
Multiple values of @adverb
are interpreted to mean "and" with intersection. No distribution takes place (e.g., adverb="x y" means "[subject] x & y [verby]...", not "[subject] x [verb]..." and "[subject] y [verb]...").
Formal Definition
Used by: ~claim
Example 8.213. @adverb
<TAN-A-div TAN-version="1 dev" id="tag:parkj@textalign.net,2015:ar.cat.tan-a-div:claims"> ......... <body claimant="lmp"> <comment when="2017-03-10-05:00" who="park">The following two claims interpret Minio-Paluello's apparatus criticus entry for 1a2, which suggests that Andronicus and Boethus might have omitted τῆς οὐσίας (based on what Porphyry and Dexippus say) and asserts that the reading adopted is found in the seven commentators. This interpretation sticks close to M-P's original, and does not fill in important gaps. For example, Dexippus's remark comes from his commentary, 1.18 (p. 21.20) and is reliant wholly on a fragment of Porphyry preserved in Simplicius's commentary, p. 30.1-2. Furthermore, these sources show that the claim is not that Andronicus and Boethus omitted the text, or relied on sources that had omitted it, but that they observed that there were manuscripts that had done so.</comment> <claim subject="andronicus boethus" adverb="perhaps" verb="omits" claim-basis="dexippus porphyry"> <locus work="grc"> ......... </locus> </claim> <claim subject="herminus comm-omnes" verb="agrees"> ......... </claim> ......... <claim subject="B" verb="replaces"> ......... </claim> <claim subject="Λ" adverb="perhaps" verb="replaces"> <locus work="grc"> ......... </locus> <object>τις ἀποδιδῷ</object> </claim> <claim subject="π α φ ο" verb="agrees"> ......... </claim> </body> </TAN-A-div>
Note | |
---|---|
Taken from ar.cat.tan-a-div.claims |
The attribute claim-basis
points to an entity that serves as the rationale for why a claim was made.
Formal Definition
Used by: ~rationale
Example 8.214. @claim-basis
<body claimant="lmp"> <comment when="2017-03-10-05:00" who="park">The following two claims interpret Minio-Paluello's apparatus criticus entry for 1a2, which suggests that Andronicus and Boethus might have omitted τῆς οὐσίας (based on what Porphyry and Dexippus say) and asserts that the reading adopted is found in the seven commentators. This interpretation sticks close to M-P's original, and does not fill in important gaps. For example, Dexippus's remark comes from his commentary, 1.18 (p. 21.20) and is reliant wholly on a fragment of Porphyry preserved in Simplicius's commentary, p. 30.1-2. Furthermore, these sources show that the claim is not that Andronicus and Boethus omitted the text, or relied on sources that had omitted it, but that they observed that there were manuscripts that had done so.</comment> <claim subject="andronicus boethus" adverb="perhaps" verb="omits" claim-basis="dexippus porphyry"> <locus work="grc"> ......... </locus> </claim> <claim subject="herminus comm-omnes" verb="agrees"> ......... </claim> ......... </body>
Note | |
---|---|
Taken from ar.cat.tan-a-div.claims |
The attribute claimant
points to an <agent>
or <person>
who makes a claim. @claimant
within <body>
indicates the default persons to be credited or blamed for an assertion.
Claimants are not to be confused with the editor of a TAN file. If an editor X writes a TAN-c file that says that person Y makes such-and-such a claim, then the implication is that X claims that Y claims that....
This attribute is taken into account before all other attributes. That is, @claimant
is to be interpreted to mean: "@claimant
states the following:...." Multiple values of @claimant
are interpreted to mean "and", resulting in distribution of the claim (e.g., claimant="x y" becomes "x claims that..." and "y claims that...").
If you wish to claim that claimant X claimed that claimant Y claimed that claimant Z...., only the original claimant is given to @claimant
, and each of the other claimants are placed in a @subject
in an embedded <claim>
that serves as the object of the master <claim>
.
This attribute is inheritable. See the section called “Interpretation of inheritable attributes”
Formal Definition
Used by: ~set-of-claims
, ~other-body-attributes
, ~claim
Example 8.215. @claimant
<TAN-A-div TAN-version="1 dev" id="tag:parkj@textalign.net,2015:ar.cat.tan-a-div:claims"> <head> ......... </head> <body claimant="lmp"> <comment when="2017-03-10-05:00" who="park">The following two claims interpret Minio-Paluello's apparatus criticus entry for 1a2, which suggests that Andronicus and Boethus might have omitted τῆς οὐσίας (based on what Porphyry and Dexippus say) and asserts that the reading adopted is found in the seven commentators. This interpretation sticks close to M-P's original, and does not fill in important gaps. For example, Dexippus's remark comes from his commentary, 1.18 (p. 21.20) and is reliant wholly on a fragment of Porphyry preserved in Simplicius's commentary, p. 30.1-2. Furthermore, these sources show that the claim is not that Andronicus and Boethus omitted the text, or relied on sources that had omitted it, but that they observed that there were manuscripts that had done so.</comment> <claim subject="andronicus boethus" adverb="perhaps" verb="omits" claim-basis="dexippus porphyry"> ......... </claim> <claim subject="herminus comm-omnes" verb="agrees"> ......... </claim> ......... </body> </TAN-A-div>
Note | |
---|---|
Taken from ar.cat.tan-a-div.claims |
The attribute object
takes one or more ID refs of entities defined in <head>
that serve as the grammatical object of a claim. For example, if you wish to say that work A is a commentary on work B, then the object would have the ID ref for work B. If you wish to make more complex assertions, use <object>
.
Multiple values of @object
are interpreted to mean "and", resulting in distribution of the claim (e.g., object="x y" becomes "[subject] [verb] x" and "[subject] [verb] y...").
In RDF, the concept of object (the third element of a triple) is required. In TAN-c, it is not required, since some <verb>
s may be intransitive (e.g., "Charlie slept.").
Formal Definition
The attribute object-datatype
specifies the type of data that the object must take. This attribute is intended to specify that a particular verb governs raw units, not entities definable by the IRI + name pattern. Use this attribute if and only if the verb may not govern objects defined in <declarations>
.
Formal Definition
string (pattern string|boolean|decimal|float|double|duration|dateTime|time|date|gYearMonth|gYear|gMonthDay|gDay|gMonth|hexBinary|base64Binary|anyURI|QName|normalizedString|token|language|NMTOKEN|NMTOKENS|Name|NCName|ID|IDREF|IDREFS|ENTITY|ENTITIES|integer|nonPositiveInteger|negativeInteger|long|int|short|byte|nonNegativeInteger|unsignedLong|unsignedInt|unsignedShort|unsignedByte|positiveInteger)
Used by: ~object-constraint
Caution | |
---|---|
Claims involving verbs whose object is constrained must use |
Caution | |
---|---|
Verbs that have object constraints must not be combined with other verbs in |
Caution | |
---|---|
|
Example 8.216. @object-datatype
<declarations> ......... <verb xml:id="agrees" which="agrees"/> <verb xml:id="replaces" which="replaces" object-datatype="string"/> <modal which="possibly" xml:id="perhaps"/> </declarations>
Note | |
---|---|
Taken from ar.cat.tan-a-div.claims |
The attribute object-lexical-constraint
specifies a regular expression that constrains the value of any <object>
.
Note that the regular expression will be strictly followed, e.g., "\d+" will be satisfied by "a1". If you wish to constrain the entire value, be sure to use ^ and $, e.g., "^\d+$".
Formal Definition
Used by: ~object-constraint
Caution | |
---|---|
Claims involving verbs whose object is constrained must use |
Caution | |
---|---|
Verbs that have object constraints must not be combined with other verbs in |
Caution | |
---|---|
|
The attribute subject
points to one or more ID refs of entities defined in <head>
that serve as the grammatical subject of a claim. @subject
within <body>
indicates the default subject(
s) for <claim>
s.
Multiple values of @subject
are interpreted to mean "and", resulting in distribution of the claim (e.g., subject="x y" becomes "x [verby]..." and "y [verb]...").
Formal Definition
Used by: ~set-of-claims
, ~other-body-attributes
, ~claim
, ~subject
The attribute units
points to the ID ref of a <unit>
, defining the type of units.
Formal Definition
Used by: ~nontextual-reference
The attribute verb
points to one or more <verb>
s that serve to assert something of the @subject.
The preferred term "verb" is equivalent to RDF "predicate." The latter term is avoided as being misleading -- most who use TAN will understand "predicate," grammatically speaking, to refer to everything in a sentence that is not the subject.
Multiple values of @verb
are interpreted to mean "and", resulting in distribution of the claim (e.g., verb="x y" becomes "[subject] x ..." and "[subject] y...").
Formal Definition
Used by: ~set-of-claims
, ~other-body-attributes
, ~claim
Caution | |
---|---|
Any predefined strictures on verbs must be respected. |
The attribute where
restricts the <claim>
to a specific <place>
.
Multiple values of @where
are interpreted to mean "or" with union. No distribution takes place (e.g., where="x y" means "[subject] x or y [verby]...", not "[subject] x [verb]..." and "[subject] y [verb]...").
Formal Definition
Used by: ~claim