conference call (fwd)

Syd Bauman Syd_Bauman at brown.edu
Mon Jun 24 22:17:54 EDT 2002



> Perry, that wasn't your fault, it was mine.

Too bad. Would have been more fun to blame the Indiana legislature.

<p>> JMU's unofficial minutes

I have not incorporated John's notes into my own (but I have incorp-
orated Merrilee's), but I'm way too tired to do so now. I will be
mostly unavailable tomorrow (Tue 25 Jul), so rather than make y'all
wait 2 days, I'm sending what I have now. W/o John's notes, and not
proofread. If you're anxious, read it now; if you'd prefer the
improved version, should have that out on Thu 27 morning.

--------- begin wwbvxiyhtrd[1] ---------
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "./meet-mins.dtd">
<TEI.2>
  <teiHeader>
    <fileDesc>
      <titleStmt>
        <title>TEI Council 2002-06-24 Conference Call Notes</title>
        <author>Syd Bauman</author>
      </titleStmt>
      <publicationStmt>
        <p>Intended for distribution to TEI Council members for
          corrections; corrected version to TEI Secretary for
          archiving.</p>
      </publicationStmt>
      <sourceDesc>
        <p>No sourse; this electronic version is the source.</p>
        <p>This document was created from the notes I took (in TEI
          Lite, btw) during the conversation, with some additions
          provided by the notes MP took and sent to me; with a few
          afterthoughts as well, usually relegated to &lt;note>
          elements.</p>
      </sourceDesc>
    </fileDesc>
  </teiHeader>
  <text>
    <front>
      <div type="glossary">
        <p>Names are copied-and-pasted from TEI website, so don't
          blame me for misspellings :-).</p>
        <list>
          <head>Initialis Used for People</head>
          <item><term>SB</term> <gloss>Syd Bauman</gloss></item>
          <item><term>LB</term> <gloss>Lou Burnard</gloss></item>
          <item><term>MD</term> <gloss>Matthew Driscoll</gloss></item>
          <item><term>DD</term> <gloss>David Durand</gloss></item>
          <item><term>TE</term> <gloss>Toma&#382; Erjavec</gloss></item>
          <item><term>DB</term> <gloss>David J. Birnbaum</gloss></item>
          <item><term>FJ</term> <gloss>Fotis Jannidis</gloss></item>
          <item><term>MM</term> <gloss>Martin Mueller</gloss></item>
          <item><term>MP</term> <gloss>Merrilee Proffitt</gloss></item>
          <item><term>SR</term> <gloss>Sebastian Rahtz</gloss></item>
          <item><term>PR</term> <gloss>Peter Robinson</gloss></item>
          <item><term>GR</term> <gloss>Geoffrey Rockwell</gloss></item>
          <item><term>LR</term> <gloss>Laurent Romary</gloss></item>
          <item><term>JU</term> <gloss>John Unsworth</gloss></item>
          <item><term>PW</term> <gloss>C. Perry Willett</gloss></item>
          <item><term>CW</term> <gloss>Christian Wittern</gloss></item>
        </list>
      </div>
    </front>
    <body>
      <div type="prelim">
        <p>Call commenced at ~ 12:01-00 with GR, SB, FJ, PW, MP, LB,
          SR, JU, DB; MD joined a bit later; CW &amp; TE never joined
          (nor did DD nor LR, but that was expected).</p>
        <p>CW &amp; TE, it turns out, were the victims of mistaken
          timezone.</p>
      </div>
      <div n="1" type="agendaItem">
        <head>committee reports</head>
        <div n="1B" type="subAgendaItem">
          <head>Training</head>
          <p>GR explained the training committee had written 1 general
            and 2 specific (for Chicago 2002-10, and for GA 2003) RFPs
            for training courses. Suggested that within a few weeks all
            3 would be edited &amp; posted. SB said the programme
            committee for the Oct member's meeting would like that
            specific RFP out ASAP, preferably shortly after MMs return. GR
            thinks that's reasonable (he will be talking to MM on phone
            circa 06-28).</p>
          <p>Thanks to the training committee for this work.</p>
          <p>Lou recommends that the three RFPs be combined into one;
            general agreement, there should be one RFP, with an
            appendix that gives particulars for upcoming events that
            require specific proposals.
            <action>
              <name>GR</name>
              <resp>Inform training committee of recommendation from
                Council to combine RFPs</resp>
            </action>
            <action>
              <name>training committee</name>
              <resp>Combine RFPs into one general with reference to
                the two specific events, perhaps as an
                appendix.</resp>
            </action><note>In retrospect, I am not yet 100% convinced
              of the wisdom of this, and plan to send the council
              thoughts on the matter if I am still unconvinced after
              discussing w/ GR. -- Syd</note></p>
          <p>GR notes that, esp. for proposals for training at the Oct
            member's meeting, they do not have to be full-blown
            proposals. SB points out that programme committee is
            expecting a 1-day training on Thu 2002-10-10.</p>
          <p>Although questions about an RFP may (or should) be sent to
            the training committee, and questions about the venue, etc.,
            may (or should) be sent to the local organizer, the
            Proposals themselves should be sent to JU, who will forward
            them to the Council for [dis]approval.</p>
          <p>Motion that amended (as discussed) RFPs be accepted; passed.</p>
          <p><action>
              <name>LB</name>
              <name>SR</name>
              <resp>send a response to the general RFP for their 15 Jul
                course</resp>
              <by date="2002-07-01"/></action></p>
        </div>
        <div n="1A" type="subAgendaItem">
          <head>certification</head>
          <p>Software certification discussion: we're leaning towards
            encouraging reviews of software (cull form TEI-L?)
            (certify reviewers? certify reviews?)
            <action>
              <name>MD</name>
              <name>SB to proof if MD wants</name>
              <resp>write a draft certification policy</resp>
            </action>
            <action>
              <name>SR</name>
              <name>LB</name>
              <resp>cull the list for reviews to put on website</resp>
            </action><note>LB &amp; SR &mdash; if you like, let me
              know when you're ready to roll, and I'll send you an
              archive of the list. -- SB</note>
          So we are shifting from certification to reviews.</p>
        </div>
      </div>
      <div n="2" type="agendaItem">
        <head>P5</head>
        <div n="2A" type="subAgendaItem">
          <head>core tags and schema</head>
          <p>Discussion of SR's proposal <bibl><title>notes for
                conference call on 24th</title> <date>2002-06-24
                00:25+01</date></bibl>-- SB thinks timescale
            aggresive, but SR &amp; JU think it's reasonable (better
            to have too aggresive a deadline than none at all).</p>
          <p>SB agrees strongly that TSD become an additional tagset,
            and that P5 be written in (possibly extended) TSD.</p>
          <p>SR suggests Son of Odd report for members meeting
            2002-10; SB suggests [dis]approval by Council in 2003-01;
            SR recommends including discussions of manuscript, char
            sets, standoff to that 2003-01 council meeting; MP reports
            manuscript should be ready.</p>
          <p>Within the discussion there was concensus that it's
            important to change from DTD notation to some other
            notation inside &lt;elemDecl>s (whether a pre-existing
            schema or our own is still an open question), and to allow
            multiple schema output from odds (i.e., to give TEI users
            choice in which schema language they use to validate their
            TEI documents).</p>
          <p>Motion to accept SR's timetable as a framework approved.</p>
          <p><action>
              <name>SR</name>
              <resp>talk to PR or SB about getting a timeslot to
                report on Son of Odd at 2002-10 member's meeting in
                Chicago, perhaps as part of editor's report.</resp>
            </action> SB reports that he thinks the preliminary plan
            already has 20 mins for editors and a separate 20 mins for
            SR.</p>
        </div>
        <div n="2B" type="subAgendaItem">
          <head>character encoding WG update</head>
          <p>LB reports on char sets WG progress -- lots of discussion
            via e-mail, mostly centered on how much of the world's
            problems Unicode solves. Face-to-face WG meeting planned
            for 2002-07-23/24 in T&uuml;bingen (in conjunction with
            ALLC/ACH 2002). Both SB &amp; plan to be present. WG is
            working on detailed proposals for a replacement to WSD
            mechanism which LB (&amp; SB) expect will be discussed at
            WG meeting in T&uuml;bingen. CW doing good job keeping it
            going w/o domination by a particular person or
            constituency.</p>
          <p>Council agreed that requirement for 1.5 days of meeting
            in order to obtain TEI reimbursement be waved, if needed,
            for this WG meeting. It was suggested that council need
            not vote, that chair could just do this
            unilaterally.<action>
              <name>JU</name>
              <resp>Notify CW of relaxed restriction of 1.5 days for
                character sets WG meeting in T&uuml;bingen
                2002-07.</resp>
            </action><note>Since the council had agreed, I didn't take
              up valuable phone time saying this, but I think it is
              important that no single individual have the power to
              unilaterally make exceptions to or grant exemptions from
              promulgated rules or procedures like those in ED W 54. I
              think that such decisions need to be reserved for the
              council or board, or for a pre-defined group of officers
              (chair and both editors; chair, executive director, one
              editor; chair, executive director, one host representive
              &mdash; idunno)</note>
          </p>
        </div>
        <div n="2C" type="subAgendaItem">
          <head>stand-off markup, xlink, xpointer WG</head>
          <p>SB reported on WG progress by briefly reading some
            sections of DD's mail to group
            <bibl><date>2002-06-19T16:31-04,</date>
              <title>startup</title></bibl>:        
            <quote>&hellip; it's past time for us to start up.
              &hellip; trying to get John Garofolo of NIST to join the
              group; if he does not, I will entertain suggestions of
              corpus linguists who might join the group. &hellip; an
              email list, supplemented by a regular conference call
              &hellip; initial suggestion that the call be on
              alternate Wednesdays, starting on 2002-06-26, at
              13:00-00. &hellip; attached the preliminary
              <soCalled>charge</soCalled> &hellip; Preliminary agenda:
              <list>
                <item>introductions</item>
                <item>proceedures: &hellip;</item>
                <item>time limit: &hellip;</item>
                <item>reactions to charge: &hellip;</item>
              </list>
            </quote>
          </p>
          <p>Council wanted assurance that an editor would be
            available for each call; SB &amp; LB do not think this
            will be a problem.</p>
          <p>Someone voiced concern as to whether or not council
            should be worried about lack of progress &mdash;
            [preliminary or draft? -- SB] report is due [2002-08-01 or
            2002-10-11? -- SB]. SB said no need to worry yet, but
            should recheck after [2 or 3] of the planned conference
            calls (and then become concerned if little or no
            progress).
            <action>
              <name>SB or LB (whichever one makes conference call)</name>
              <resp>keep council posted on WG progress</resp>
            </action>
          </p>
        </div>
        <div n="2D" type="subAgendaItem">
          <head>medieval MSS description</head>
          <p>While MP may not be at member's meeting (snif! What's
            wrong with a TEI meeting as a honeymoon? Well,
            congratulations in any case), she is still hopeful that
            she and MD can get together this summer to hammer out
            differences in manuscript description stuff.</p>
        </div>
        <div n="3" type="agendaItem">
          <head>next meeting, assignments, future business</head>
          <p>Future meetings: We like conference calls; SB suggests
            one roughly every 3 months.
            <action>
              <name>JU</name>
              <resp>schedule future council conference calls</resp>
            </action> Perry is willing to continue hosting them. (And
            subsequently agreed to post notices in UTC, preferably in
            an unambiguous format).</p>
          <p>SR points out we need to have firm deadlines before
            2003-01 face-to-face, as it's expensive.</p>
        </div>
      </div>
    </body>
  </text>
</TEI.2>
--------- end wwbvxiyhtrd[1] ---------

Notes
-----
[1] wwbvxiyhtrd = what would be valid XML if you had the right DTD.
    If you actually want it, I'd be happy to send it (as either TEI
    extension files or as a pizza-page flattened DTD) along.



More information about the tei-council mailing list