EDW54 (please review)

[Merrilee Proffitt]

This document generally seems good, here are my comments.  I hope they are 
intelligible.

Update status

**Preamble (under toc before General), paragraph 2: I am not following the 
chartered bit.  Shouldn't it be:

"...TEI-chartered work groups, whether internal (funded by the TEI), 
external (funded by some other body, but recognized by the TEI and given a 
TEI work group charter), or mixed (anything else or anything in between).

eliminating the redundancy and confusion of who is doing the chartering -- 
in TEI terms, the TEI is doing the chartering, even if direction also 
coming from some other source.

Knock out the bit about ", gleaned from the authors' experience in work 
group meetings both inside and outside the TEI." (sounds a bit preachy).

**Under General, first paragraph:

Do work groups get appointed by board under recommendation by the council, 
or simply by the council?  The bylaw say that we "have the power to create 
working groups."

This paragraph should also introduce the concept of some work items going 
away because other, better, standards have come along and may be used 
instead (MathML or tables being examples).

**Membership:

Question: why should membership distribution requirements be waived in the 
case of externally-funded work?

**Documents:

Well, should there be an expiration date for documents?
What about the boilerplate text?  What goes here?
Include a link to TEI A1 and TEI ED W55 (and maybe titles of documents, as 
was done with TEI ED W48?).

<p>**Overall:
Update URLs
Is it work group or Work Group?  Should be consistent.
TEI Guidelines or TEI <title>Guidelines</title>?
Clarification as to who funds editors'/an editor's travel to work group 
meetings.

<p>At 03:22 PM 1/16/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Please review EDW54 (the draft document outlining rules pertaining to TEI 
>workgroups), which can be found at:
>
>http://www.tei-c.org/Vault/ED/edw54.htm
>
>We will need to use this document soon, so please send any comments within 
>the week.
>
>John