@manufrancis:
- would it be desirable, to your mind
- to display our insitutional logos on homepage https://dharmalekha.info and/or at https://dharmalekha.info/about?
- to display ERC logos on either of those pages?
- is it possible to come up with shorter and ideally also more transparent repo names so that the two SII repos don't déborde to a second line in the list of repos at https://dharmalekha.info/search? (see screenshot)?
suggestion: tfa-SII-original-epigraphy (display "SII original") vs tfa-SII-adapted-epigraphy (display "SII adapted") — given the nature of these editions, I see some virtue for recognizability in using the well-known abbreviation SII rather than spelling our the full title.
now that I have come here, I think I have misundertood the difference between
- South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (4028)
- South Indian Inscriptions (tfa) (171)
I initially thought the former was the collection of files received from Malten before processing by TFA. But now I see that this is not the case. The latter seems to be simply a pool of items once edited in SII that have been re-edited by DHARMA but without being able to fit into any specific repo. This means that, essentially, they belong to Tamil Nadu (varia), right? (I guess the difference is that the items in the latter have never been edited in SII?) Since we don't show Malten's original files to our users, I really don't see the use of maintaining the separation between the the two SII repos at all, and I see advantages (in terms of transparency for external users such as myself) in merging them, or in merging South Indian Inscriptions (tfa) with Tamil Nadu (varia). The XML files themselves can make clear whether for a given inscription the edition does or does not involve anything more than reproducing the contents of the SII item in XML form. In any case, for the filters to function the difference between repos should be as transparent as possible.
@manufrancis:
suggestion: tfa-SII-original-epigraphy (display "SII original") vs tfa-SII-adapted-epigraphy (display "SII adapted") — given the nature of these editions, I see some virtue for recognizability in using the well-known abbreviation SII rather than spelling our the full title.
now that I have come here, I think I have misundertood the difference between
I initially thought the former was the collection of files received from Malten before processing by TFA. But now I see that this is not the case. The latter seems to be simply a pool of items once edited in SII that have been re-edited by DHARMA but without being able to fit into any specific repo. This means that, essentially, they belong to Tamil Nadu (varia), right? (I guess the difference is that the items in the latter have never been edited in SII?) Since we don't show Malten's original files to our users, I really don't see the use of maintaining the separation between the the two SII repos at all, and I see advantages (in terms of transparency for external users such as myself) in merging them, or in merging South Indian Inscriptions (tfa) with Tamil Nadu (varia). The XML files themselves can make clear whether for a given inscription the edition does or does not involve anything more than reproducing the contents of the SII item in XML form. In any case, for the filters to function the difference between repos should be as transparent as possible.