Fwd: Re: MEP dtd and documentation

[Sebastian Rahtz]

It is hard to see what is going on here, exactly, without a formal
definition of what "conforming to the TEI" means. My view is that
a DTD which is supposed to be derived from the TEI should supply
the set of extensions and entity definitions which define the
difference. In the wealth of material in MEP I do not see that, I do see
an initial example of

<!DOCTYPE doc
  PUBLIC "-//MEP//DTD Model Editions Partnership
  data capture level 3 ver. 2.0//EN" >
<doc>
<mepHeader>
  <sender>Abraham Lincoln</sender>
  <docDate>April 10. 1862</docDate>
  <addressee>Richard Yates</addressee>
  <addressee>William Butler</addressee>
  <preparedBy>David R. Chesnutt and C. M. Sperberg-McQueen</preparedBy>
  <prepDate>31 August 1998</prepDate>
  <prepDate>20 October 1998</prepDate>
  <idno>... (document tracking number) </idno>
  <sourceDesc><bibl>Abraham Lincoln, <title>Speeches and
    Writings 1859-1865</title> (New York:  Library of
    America, 1989), p. 315.</bibl></sourceDesc>
</mepHeader>

which it would take a very broad-minded person to claim was
TEI-conformant :-}

Still, with the imprimatur of Signor Sperberg-McQueen, who can argue?

What is there to discuss, John?  plainly we can store this stuff in the
TEI archive (bearing in mind that the TEI does not *have* any form of
secure archive), but what else? are we supposed to support it in some
way?

-- 
Sebastian Rahtz      OUCS Information Manager
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431