WWP Encoding Guide

From: Julia Flanders
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 16:25:00 -0400

Apologies for a lengthy and tardy post. I've looked through all of
the suggestions. The ones that Syd posted I won't comment on, except
to say I support them all (having been involved in their evolution).
If anyone has questions of the "why on earth" variety about these, I
can probably provide specifics.
On the others, several seem like very good ideas:
--publisher children/requiring explicit relation between publisher and pubPlace
--Hilde Boe's suggestions on manuscript encoding, and the realRhyme=
attribute; I can't judge the usefulness of the an= and realAn=
attributes.
--improve handling of letters: this seems like a high priority to me.
Could we give Nick and Edward an official commission to come up with
a proposal?
--names/prosopography module: this seems like a good idea. I'd also
like to propose that and be designated for use
not just in describing speakers in a linguistic corpus, but also more
generally any participant in the document's creation/production/etc.
In other words, if I want to document demographic info on a set of
authors, editors, translators, even printers and publishers, this
would be a logical place to do it.
--adding namespace info to : the goal is clearly important.
I like the element as a wrapper around
elements, not least because we could also provide therein a place to
provide info about that namespace. I think we could even require this
element (rather than allowing it to be optional and assuming TEI
namespace in its absence); this will be the least of people's
conversion challenges when they go to P5. As an alternative, wouldn't
a namespace= attribute on do the trick? Are there
significant advantages to grouping all the elements from a given
namespace within a wrapper? As an addendum: I would suggest that we
drop the requirement that there be a element for every GI;
the useful functions of these days seem to me to be
rendition and documentation; verification of the number of elements
seems a little old-fashioned.
--revision of

: seems good to me, but I'm not sure I
understand the proposal exactly--is the element intended to
appear both within (which would have the content model of
current

element) and also as a direct child of

?
Also: the current content model of figure doesn't allow for the fact
that text (including poetry) may appear both/either above and below
the graphical content of the figure. It would be good to be able to
accommodate this fact. It's also good to preserve the current
distinction between the text that accompanies the figure (headings,
captions, etc.) and text that is actually embedded within the image
content (e.g. speech ballons, painter signatures, banners, signs,
etc.).
Some seem like interesting ideas that aren't fully perfect, or aren't urgent:
--Andrea Nolda's thoughts on inline, displayed, and floating
elements: I sympathize with the goals of this one, but I'm not sure
it's a good thing for TEI to specify default rendering behavior. This
seems like something that should be handled by allowing authors to
set renditional defaults, and this is already possible in TEI with
. For the rest, I disagree with him, I think things like
what to do with the value of n= *should* be left to the stylesheet,
and the author is free to create such a stylesheet if he/she wants to
constrain the appearance of the document.
--the accept= attribute on , , and : it seems
to me that if the symbols are to stand just as symbols, they should
just be encoded as renditional facts. If the problem is that there's
no consensus about the symbols to be used and their interpretation,
perhaps the better thing would be to bypass the symbols and allow the
accept= attribute to have a set of specific values (more nuanced, by
the looks of things, than "yes | no") which represent a superset of
the values/interpretations currently in use, allowing the user to
employ a subset as appropriate. Then the symbols could just be
rendered with a stylesheet. I don't think having an accept= attribute
with values "* | ? | ?* | (?) | #" etc. is such a great idea. But
this isn't an area I'm familiar with, so I'm going on logic, not
experience.
--type= on ; I'm susceptible to this because I believe
type= is so generally useful. It doesn't seem overwhelmingly urgent
to me, or likely to affect a lot of users, but I can see the utility.
--revision of ; this seems confused to me. If the
element is intended to mark the point in the flow of text where the
index entry points, this doesn't seem like a good place to put
information about how the index entry itself is going to look (e.g.
"see also" references, etc.). Surely the point is that some software
comes along and gathers up all the elements and processes
them into an index entry. No single point can be expected to
carry the extra information for the entry itself. I think the problem
is real--this extra information is needed--but packing it into
doesn't seem like a good approach. I also don't see the
function of the element; is its content intended to
become part of the index entry, or is it just the basis for a link?
--add / to etc.: seems reasonable to want to
have content/markup in a label
--make non-empty to allow for values with internal markup:
seems reasonable.
--add to the typed class to allow for subtype=: I agree
with the basic idea here, but I wonder whether a unit= attribute
would be better than subtype=; it would more explicitly capture the
semantics of what John Walsh seems to be after. I also wonder (while
we're on this) whether it would be better to have the number as a
separate attribute, rather than including it as part of the reg=
attribute.
--generic element in header: I'm on the fence about
this. I guess it's the equivalent of providing

and and
; why shouldn't there also be a generic metadata element in the
header? But I also feel as if we should be attempting to provide for
all the reasonable classes of metadata in a more specific way. In
other words, this shouldn't become the dustbin where we put metadata
ideas that don't fit into the existing TEI header. The prospects for
interchange with this generic element seem pretty poor.

Possibly unnecessary?
--Hilda Boe's suggestion for extending metrical analysis of verse:
doesn't the realMet= attribute duplicate the functionality of the
existing real= attribute?
Best, Julia
>At our next phone call, scheduled for 20 Sept, it would be very
>helpful if council members could give some initial comments on the
>various suggestions for enhancements which have so far been
>accumulating on sourceforge. I was going to attempt a summary of
>them all, and can easily produce a list if so required, but
>discussion will be much more productive if council members have
>already read at least some of the arguments before hand.
>
>The easiest way of doing this is for you to point your browser at
>http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=644065&group_id=106328&func=browse
>
>(or navigate to the "feature requests" from http://tei.sourceforge.net)
>
>If you want to add comments on any item (or add new items) before
>the meeting, that would also be much appreciated!
>
>I am also working on a document
>(http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/edw83.xml) which attempts to summarize
>all other "work in progress" for P5. This is far from complete, but
>I hope to get it into better shape in good time for the phone call.
>All input gratefully received!
>
>Lou
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>tei-council mailing list
>tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Sep 13 2004 - 16:26:06 EDT

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 13 17:17:00 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:17:00 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41460E4C.2070102@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:17:00 +0100

Julia Flanders wrote:
> Apologies for a lengthy and tardy post. I've looked through all of the
> suggestions.
Many thanks for these! I will post a few specific comments in response
to some of them, just for the sake of clarity. To aid comprehension I
will respond as separate notes though (at some point it would be useful
to integrate them into the SourceForge record too -- do you mind if I do
that?
L
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Sep 13 2004 - 17:03:48 EDT

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 13 17:24:23 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:24:23 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion: nameSpace/tagUsage In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41461007.4040007@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:24:23 +0100

Julia Flanders wrote:
> --adding namespace info to : the goal is clearly important. I
> like the element as a wrapper around elements,
> not least because we could also provide therein a place to provide info
> about that namespace. I think we could even require this element (rather
> than allowing it to be optional and assuming TEI namespace in its
> absence); this will be the least of people's conversion challenges when
> they go to P5. As an alternative, wouldn't a namespace= attribute on
> do the trick? Are there significant advantages to grouping
> all the elements from a given namespace within a wrapper?
A namespace has to be supplied as a fairly long string: a namespace
attribute on every tagUsage element would be quite a high overhead imho.
As an
> addendum: I would suggest that we drop the requirement that there be a
> element for every GI; the useful functions of
> these days seem to me to be rendition and documentation; verification of
> the number of elements seems a little old-fashioned.
I fear I don't agree here. Documentation of tagUsage should include
information about frequency of deployment: that's what it's for. It's
not just for verification -- if I am doing a quick trawl through a
digital library to find texts containing elements, I really want
to reliably know which texts have got oodles of them and which haven't.
I think that recommended rendition info should be in a separate element.
It confuses the issue to lump it together with tagUsage and seems
unwontedly normative aspect in this context. Also, separating it out
would enable you to document different rendition policies for the same
element.
Lou

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Sep 13 2004 - 17:11:21 EDT

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 13 17:30:12 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:30:12 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion: figure and figdesc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41461164.9000508@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:30:12 +0100

Julia Flanders wrote:

> --revision of

: seems good to me, but I'm not sure I understand
> the proposal exactly--is the element intended to appear both
> within (which would have the content model of current

> element) and also as a direct child of

? Also: the current
> content model of figure doesn't allow for the fact that text (including
> poetry) may appear both/either above and below the graphical content of
> the figure. It would be good to be able to accommodate this fact. It's
> also good to preserve the current distinction between the text that
> accompanies the figure (headings, captions, etc.) and text that is
> actually embedded within the image content (e.g. speech ballons, painter
> signatures, banners, signs, etc.).
>
Apologies for lack of clarity. should NOT contain
but be a sibling of it. The idea is that figure should contain heading
information, figDesc, figText, a element of some kind, and
possibly a nested figure. Making figText repeatable around is
certainly a possibility, and one I hadn't thought of, though the details
may be a little complicated to interpret. Maybe the REND attribute of
should be used to specify whereabouts the text is located in
the image in question.

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 13 17:32:28 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:32:28 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <414611EC.1000608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:32:28 +0100

Julia Flanders wrote:
-revision of ; this seems confused to me. If the element
is intended to mark the point in the flow of text where the index entry
points, this doesn't seem like a good place to put information about how
the index entry itself is going to look (e.g. "see also" references,
etc.). Surely the point is that some software comes along and gathers up
all the elements and processes them into an index entry. No
single point can be expected to carry the extra information for
the entry itself. I think the problem is real--this extra information is
needed--but packing it into doesn't seem like a good approach. I
also don't see the function of the element; is its
content intended to become part of the index entry, or is it just the
basis for a link?
I share Julia's misgivings on this one. I also wonder whether we
shouldn't be thinking a bit harder about how to integrate topic maps
with the TEI (John Walsh gave a very good paper on this at DRH, by the
way) instead of trying to soup up to do something similar.

From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Mon Sep 13 21:37:52 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Flanders, Julia) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:37:52 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion In-Reply-To: <[tei-council] Topics for discussion> Message-ID: <1A97D3D73A03FC419D87967D3CE4760C4BC875@MAIL1.AD.Brown.Edu>

From: Flanders, Julia
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:37:52 -0400

I'm happy to have them integrated into the SourceForge record--in fact I should have done that myself. Many thanks...
Best, Julia
-----Original Message-----
From: Lou Burnard [mailto:lou.burnard_at_computing-services.oxford.ac.uk]
Sent: Mon 9/13/04 17:17
To: Flanders, Julia
Cc: tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
Subject: Re: [tei-council] Topics for discussion

Julia Flanders wrote:
> Apologies for a lengthy and tardy post. I've looked through all of the
> suggestions.
Many thanks for these! I will post a few specific comments in response
to some of them, just for the sake of clarity. To aid comprehension I
will respond as separate notes though (at some point it would be useful
to integrate them into the SourceForge record too -- do you mind if I do
that?
L
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Sep 13 2004 - 21:39:31 EDT

From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Mon Sep 13 21:39:37 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Flanders, Julia) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:39:37 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion: nameSpace/tagUsage In-Reply-To: <[tei-council] Topics for discussion: nameSpace/tagUsage> Message-ID: <1A97D3D73A03FC419D87967D3CE4760C4BC876@MAIL1.AD.Brown.Edu>

From: Flanders, Julia
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:39:37 -0400

Fair enough.... I didn't think about seeking sample texts with elements but I can see the utility. (Though wouldn't other methods of searching prove more reliable? It's possible to be wrong or out of date in , whereas a grep search would tell the truth for sure.)
I have no objection to separating the renditional aspect, and agree about the unwanted/confusing normativeness of the current arrangement.
Best, Julia
As an
> addendum: I would suggest that we drop the requirement that there be a
> element for every GI; the useful functions of
> these days seem to me to be rendition and documentation; verification of
> the number of elements seems a little old-fashioned.
I fear I don't agree here. Documentation of tagUsage should include
information about frequency of deployment: that's what it's for. It's
not just for verification -- if I am doing a quick trawl through a
digital library to find texts containing elements, I really want
to reliably know which texts have got oodles of them and which haven't.
I think that recommended rendition info should be in a separate element.
It confuses the issue to lump it together with tagUsage and seems
unwontedly normative aspect in this context. Also, separating it out
would enable you to document different rendition policies for the same
element.
Lou

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Sep 15 02:59:27 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 15 Sep 2004 15:59:27 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Layout of P5 on the file system Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: 15 Sep 2004 15:59:27 +0900

Dear Council members,
One of the issues I am pondering occasionally is how to improve the
thorny issue of dealing with the physical files of the TEI
Guidelines, its various Schemas, Stylesheets entities etc. I hope
that we can find a layout of the TEI subtree on the file system,
which makes it easier to understand, use and maintain. In this
context, I would like to recommend to the Councils attention a
document by the Debian XML team, which details the layout of the XML
subsystem in Debian GNU/Linux[1] and might serve as a good starting
point for defining our own policy.
If council members would agree to this, I would like to propose to
similarily document the structure somewhere in the Guidelines and
implement it for P5.
Comments? If no objections are raised, I will put this on the
agenda for our next call.
All the best,
Christian

[1] http://debian-xml-sgml.alioth.debian.org/xml-policy/index.html
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Wed Sep 15 2004 - 02:59:44 EDT

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Wed Sep 15 16:46:36 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 21:46:36 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Layout of P5 on the file system In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4148AA2C.2050602@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 21:46:36 +0100

This would rather tie in with my work on making local Debian packages
for TEI
bits and pieces, in order to build Knoppix CDs. So if the Council
agrees that this is a problem, and the Debian spec is the answer,
I can proceed with a sample implementation. This would then
go across into the TEI Emacs bundle, for instance.
It is most definitely the plan to work with Mark Johnson
on official TEI Debian packages, so this would again
be a good stimulus.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Wed Sep 15 2004 - 16:46:01 EDT

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Sep 16 21:01:30 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 17 Sep 2004 10:01:30 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Agenda for TEI Council conference call on Monday, Sep 20th, 2004 at 1300 UTC Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: 17 Sep 2004 10:01:30 +0900

TEI Council Members and Editors:
This is the agenda for the conference call the TEI Council will
hold later this coming Monday, Sep 20th, 2004 at 1300 UTC.
Please read through the following, in advance of the call.

INSTRUCTIONS for conference call:
US participants can dial a toll-free number:
1-800-565-9881
Once you're connected, dial 239046# and you should be connected shortly.
Participants from outside the US will have to make a long-distance call to the US:
+1 416 695 7870
and then follow the same instructions.
Expected to participate:
Syd Bauman, Alejandro Bia, David Birnbaum, Lou Burnard, Matthew
Driscoll, David Durand, Julia Flanders, Sebastian Rahtz, Laurent
Romary, Natasha Smith, Susan Schreibman, Edward Vanhoutte, Perry
Willett, Christian Wittern.
(I hope I got it right this time)

Agenda:
9 items
-----------------------------------------------------

1) Review of the minutes from the call of July 2nd, 2004 (15 minutes)
Minutes of the meeting are at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm12.html
Review of action items, progress.
We would also like to review the discussions on TEI-choice
and the proposals that might be forming there. The archives for that
list are at http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=tei-choice

-----------------------------------------------------
2) Update from David Durand on the Stand-Off Markup Working Group (5 minutes)
(Charter at http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/edw74.html, website http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/)
-----------------------------------------------------
3) Report from Laurent Romary on progress of the Feature Structures
Working Group. (5 minutes)
(Charter at http://www.tei-c.org/FS/tcw01.html, website http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/FS/)
-----------------------------------------------------
4) Update on the Taskforce on Manuscript Description by Matthew
Driscoll (5 minutes)
(Charge at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcw04.html website http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/MS/)

-----------------------------------------------------
5) Update from Julia Flanders on the Physical Bibliography (PB)
Workgroup (5 minutes)
(Charge at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcw04.html website http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/PB/)

-----------------------------------------------------
6) Update from Sebastian Rahtz on Metalanguage Workgroup (10 minutes)
Charge at: http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcw02.html, website http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/META/
P5 Status

-----------------------------------------------------

7) Review of proposals on SF (20 minutes)
Please look and comment on the proposals *in advance to the call* at
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=644065&group_id=106328&func=browse

8) Other business (5 minutes)

TBA

9) Meetings: (5 minutes)
Preparations for Members Meeting.

-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Thu Sep 16 2004 - 21:01:41 EDT

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Fri Sep 17 12:48:31 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:48:31 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Re: sanskrit examples In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <414B155F.90805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:48:31 +0100

My apologies for not having done this already. As my earlier note
suggested I did try to discuss the solution with John over the phone
last month, but I should certainly have completed the action I
volunteered for at the last Council call well before now: my bad (as my
daughter likes to say).
Anyway, to recap on the issue....
John's document proposed two examples (I have not tried to include the
accented characters in this email, since they dont really affect the issue)
A asidraja
asit
raja

B dharamksetre
dharma
ksetre

In each case, the intention is to show that the first string ("asidraja"
or "sharamksetre") can be analysed into two constituents, and that those
two constituents need not be simple substrings of the first one.
There was (unless I am making it up) a general consensus on the council
that mixed content models of this type were less preferable than either
of the following more explicit formulations:

dharamksetre
dharma
ksetre

dharamksetre
dharma
ksetre

where I have used xxx for some element whose name is to be invented
John proposed for example:
C
dharamksetre

dharma
ksetre

Which seems reasonable enough to me. Using only the existing TEI
segmentation and analysis tags, I would suggest
D

dharamksetre

dharma
ksetre

This representation uses the ID/IDREF link supplied by ANA to point to
the analysis, which therefore need not be in the same place in the
document. This is advantageous if there are many such cases to be
marked up (I have used the arbitrary identifier "C1" but of course a
more meaningful id would be preferable, e.g. "dharma-kstre"): the
analysis need only be given once in the document.
If on the other hand the intention is always to give the two things
together, then I see no reason why they should not be grouped using a
element:
E

dharamksetre

dharma
ksetre

At present, the tei-choice group is still arguing about the details of
the choice content model, but the above usage is not -- as yet -- in
question. "choice" here means simply that there are two possible ways of
representing the phenomenon in the text, that the first one given is
physically attested in the source, and the other is an appropriate
encoding of the same phenomenon.
Lou

> Dear Lou,
>
> In the last conference call, you agreed to reencode John Smith's
> sanskrit examples using and and send this to him. If you
> have these, I would like to have a look. (He is calling me today and
> I would like to see what has been going on..)
>
> All the best,
>
> Christian
>
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Fri Sep 17 2004 - 12:50:56 EDT

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sat Sep 18 17:50:43 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 19 Sep 2004 06:50:43 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Re: sanskrit examples In-Reply-To: <414B155F.90805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: 19 Sep 2004 06:50:43 +0900

Lou Burnard oxford.ac.uk> writes:
>
>
> dharamksetre
>
>
> dharma
> ksetre
>
>
>
> At present, the tei-choice group is still arguing about the details of
> the choice content model, but the above usage is not -- as yet -- in
> question. "choice" here means simply that there are two possible ways
> of representing the phenomenon in the text, that the first one given
> is physically attested in the source, and the other is an appropriate
> encoding of the same phenomenon.
Thank you for sending this along. I agree that this looks like it
would be appropriate to discuss this in tei-choice and I think John is
preparing to do so.
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sat Sep 18 2004 - 17:51:00 EDT

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sun Sep 19 12:58:39 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 12:58:39 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] ** conference call instructions have changed ** Message-ID: <16717.47807.164172.857044@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 12:58:39 -0400

David is apparently haveing trouble posting. He says:
---------
Ingenta has changed their conference calling service to one that
reduces the cost to European participants.
The new instructions are as follows:
Call the conferencing service:
US (toll free): 1-866-722 8225
UK (toll-free): 0800 953 1275
Other International callers must call a regular UK number:
+44 1452 555 499
Should you want to call the toll number from within the UK, you would
dial: (0) 1452 555 499
when you are connected enter a PIN number:
520522#
It then asks you to state your name followed by a #. This announces you
to the list, and is probably worth doing.
---------
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Sep 19 2004 - 12:59:18 EDT

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Sep 19 17:45:01 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 22:45:01 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] report from META for TEI Council call on 20 September Message-ID: <414DFDDD.4050703@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 22:45:01 +0100

See http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/META/mew12.html for a status report
on the META work. I am
sorry you probably won't be seeing it much before the conference call,
but there is nothing
unexpected or contentious there, I think.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Sep 19 2004 - 17:44:36 EDT

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 20 17:48:42 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou-at-home) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 22:48:42 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call Message-ID: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou-at-home
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 22:48:42 +0100

Now available for comment/correction at
http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html
L
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Sep 20 2004 - 17:49:33 EDT

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Tue Sep 21 17:27:51 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou-at-home) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:27:51 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Draft updated Message-ID: <41509CD7.1030506@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou-at-home
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:27:51 +0100

Following a brief discussion with Matthew this afternoon, I have just
updated the draft at http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/MS/FASC-ms.pdf
to include in the dtd as well as the discussion text!
Matthew has agreed to review this draft and post a brief summary of any
further changes necessary before we open up discussion to the wider
world (though, as the SF ticket I circulated earlier today indicates,
word is already out)
onward and upward!
Lou
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Sep 21 2004 - 17:28:44 EDT

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Fri Sep 24 10:02:29 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:02:29 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: interim SF management proposals] Message-ID: <415428F5.4050803@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:02:29 +0100

Following some discussion between the editors, we would now like to
present to the Council the following brief notes on how we propose to
handle "feature-requests" appearing on SourceForge. This procedure
applies only to feature requests for TEI P5. Similar procedures could be
envisaged for other proposals, e.g. for enhancements to software served
from the SF site, but we have not yet elaborated the details of those.

1. Every ticket should get at least two comments, one from each editor.
Until this happens, a ticket is "open" with whatever priority was
originally assigned.
2. If comments have been made by each editor, and there appears to be a
consensus as to the correct course of action (tho not necessarily
between the two editors!), then the ticket's status will be changed as
follows:
pending: the ticket proposes a change which should be made at some
future date
closed:
EITHER: the ticket proposes a change which is not going to be
made any time soon
OR: the ticket proposes a change which has already been made
delete: the ticket proposes a change which is so silly it should be
forgotten all about
3. When a ticket changes status to "pending", it must also be assigned
to one or other of the editors, or to a nominated reviser, for action.
[A "reviser" must be registered on SF for this to be feasible]
4. If a ticket has received insuffient comments to move to stage 2
above, or if no consensus emerges as to the correct course of action,
then its priority degrades by 1 every month until it gets to the bottom
of the pile.
Comments gratefully received. A preliminary pass through the whole set
of comments has now been carried out. Council members are urged (again)
to look at any of the topics listed and contribute their own views.

From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Fri Sep 24 11:28:16 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:28:16 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Julia Flanders
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:28:16 -0400

The minutes look fine to me.
>Now available for comment/correction at
>http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html
>
>L
>_______________________________________________
>tei-council mailing list
>tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Fri Sep 24 2004 - 11:29:05 EDT

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Fri Sep 24 11:29:49 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:29:49 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: interim SF management proposals] In-Reply-To: <415428F5.4050803@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16724.15725.622715.332995@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:29:49 -0400

> Comments gratefully received. A preliminary pass through the
> whole set of comments has now been carried out. Council members
> are urged (again) to look at any of the topics listed and
> contribute their own views.
I would like to reiterate and emphasize Lou's urging that Coucnilors
actually read and comment on the feature requests. Pick a half dozen
at random, if you like. I also need to admit that I'm not quite done
with my initial pass.

From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Fri Sep 24 11:33:12 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:33:12 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: interim SF management proposals] In-Reply-To: <415428F5.4050803@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Julia Flanders
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:33:12 -0400

This procedure seems like a good one to me.
Is there provision (either automated or by hand) for making the
proposer aware of the outcome--can the proposer give an email address
and receive an automated email message saying "your proposal has been
received, thank you very much for your interest, its current status
is now X"? or do we at least envision contacting proposers personally
when we decide to close or delete their feature request?
Will the nominated revisers be chosen ad hoc by the editors, or
should we accept volunteers?
--Julia
>Following some discussion between the editors, we would now like to
>present to the Council the following brief notes on how we propose
>to handle "feature-requests" appearing on SourceForge. This
>procedure applies only to feature requests for TEI P5. Similar
>procedures could be envisaged for other proposals, e.g. for
>enhancements to software served from the SF site, but we have not
>yet elaborated the details of those.
>
>
>1. Every ticket should get at least two comments, one from each editor.
>Until this happens, a ticket is "open" with whatever priority was
>originally assigned.
>
>2. If comments have been made by each editor, and there appears to be a
>consensus as to the correct course of action (tho not necessarily
>between the two editors!), then the ticket's status will be changed as
>follows:
>
> pending: the ticket proposes a change which should be made at some
>future date
>
> closed:
> EITHER: the ticket proposes a change which is not going to be
>made any time soon
> OR: the ticket proposes a change which has already been made
>
> delete: the ticket proposes a change which is so silly it should be
>forgotten all about
>
>3. When a ticket changes status to "pending", it must also be assigned
>to one or other of the editors, or to a nominated reviser, for
>action. [A "reviser" must be registered on SF for this to be
>feasible]
>
>4. If a ticket has received insuffient comments to move to stage 2
>above, or if no consensus emerges as to the correct course of action,
>then its priority degrades by 1 every month until it gets to the
>bottom of the pile.
>
>Comments gratefully received. A preliminary pass through the whole
>set of comments has now been carried out. Council members are urged
>(again) to look at any of the topics listed and contribute their own
>views.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>tei-council mailing list
>tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Fri Sep 24 2004 - 11:33:58 EDT

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Fri Sep 24 11:43:37 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:43:37 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: interim SF management proposals] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16724.16553.911026.1013@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:43:37 -0400

> Is there provision (either automated or by hand) for making the
> proposer aware of the outcome
The good news is that the original poster, anyone who has
contributed, and anyone else who has clicked on the "monitor" button
at the top of feautre request page gets automatically notified
whenever a change is made, including to its priority. The bad news is
that SourceForge sends the *entire* request, including every comment
made so far, every time.

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Fri Sep 24 16:54:10 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 25 Sep 2004 05:54:10 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: 25 Sep 2004 05:54:10 +0900

Lou-at-home oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> Now available for comment/correction at
> http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html
Thank you; this was really fast, and my apologies for not looking
there immediately.
Under item 3, I think we not only discussed co-occurrence constraints,
but also the possibility to instantiate certain attributes either as
child elements or as attributes in a given schema (that was on the
original list of features we wanted for P5). I would like to see this
mentioned in the notes, so that we can reference it, if the need
arises.
Apart from that, the minutes loke fine to me.
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Fri Sep 24 2004 - 16:54:19 EDT

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sat Sep 25 15:33:05 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:33:05 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:33:05 -0400

Note: in the following I am using "or" to mean "inclusive or" and "or
... but not both" to mean "exclusive or", which is how I was taught
English in grade school.
> Under item 3, I think we not only discussed co-occurrence
> constraints, but also the possibility to instantiate certain
> attributes either as child elements or as attributes in a given
> schema (that was on the original list of features we wanted for
> P5). I would like to see this mentioned in the notes, so that we
> can reference it, if the need arises.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think they're the same thing. The ability to
express in a schema that something (say the "engineType" of
"automobile") is permitted as either an attribute or a child element
is, of course, trivial. The difficult part, that DTDs cannot do, is
to express that it is permitted as an attribute or a child element,
but not both. RelaxNG permits this with a construct that I believe is
called a "co-occurence constraint", but I'm not entirely sure that
this phrase isn't reserved for a specific case[1]. Thus:
element automobile {
attribute engineType { "int_combustion" | "hybrid" | "electric" },
text
}
|
element automobile {
mixed {
element engineType { text }
}
}
expresses this "either or, but not both" constraint. This is the kind
of thing I at least had in mind during the conference call.
Of course just
element automobile {
attribute engineType { "int_combustion" | "hybrid" | "electric" }?,
mixed {
element engineType { text }?
}
} [2]

with the prose "If engineType= is specified, then must
not be a child; if engineType= is not specified, then one and only
one child must be specified as a child" can be used to
express this constraint until we have a way to express it in ODDs.
(And furthermore, nifty Schematron constraints could be created to
enforce such things; sample below.)
Here are the test files I used when whipping up the above example. I
have also included the error message from two different open source
RelaxNG validators. I must admit, I don't understand the last error
message from xmllint.

start = element cars { car+ }
car =
element automobile {
attribute engineType { "int_combustion" | "hybrid" | "electric" },
text
}
| element automobile {
mixed {
element engineType { text }
}
}

->jing aet.rng aet.xml
/tmp/aet.xml:5:35: error: unfinished element
/tmp/aet.xml:6:55: error: element "engineType" not allowed in this context
->xmllint --noout --relaxng aet.rng aet.xml
aet.xml:5: element automobile: Relax-NG validity error : Element automobile failed to validate attributes
aet.xml:5: element automobile: Relax-NG validity error : Expecting an element engineType, got nothing
aet.xml:5: element automobile: Relax-NG validity error : Element automobile failed to validate content
aet.xml:4: element automobile: Relax-NG validity error : Element cars has extra content: automobile
aet.xml fails to validate
->java -jar jing.jar aet.sch aet.xml
/tmp/aet.xml:5: error: assertion failed:
Engine type must be specified. You have your choice of an attribute or child element
/tmp/aet.xml:6: error: report:
Engine type can not be specified twice.

Notes
-----
[1] I know that's what it's called when a 'value' pattern of one node
is used to change the content of another. This is usually used to
have different content models for the same element depending on
the value of an attribute. See
http://books.xmlschemata.org/relaxng/ch09s02.html.
[2] This is roughly the same as

engineType ( int_combustion | hybrid | electric ) #IMPLIED>
except that the RelaxNG constrains the document to at most 1
child.

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sat Sep 25 15:42:11 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:42:11 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <16725.51731.55041.850523@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:42:11 -0400

> Here are the test files I used when whipping up the above example.
I don't know why 3 of the 5 files I attached didn't make it through,
but I can guess. I think the ones assigned MIME type text/xml didn't
get through. They were the RelaxNG XML syntax schema, the test XML
instance (deliberately invalid), and a Schemtron schema. If anyone
actually wants to see them, let me know and I'll stick 'em up on the
web.

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sat Sep 25 2004 - 15:42:58 EDT

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Sep 26 10:55:39 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 15:55:39 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <4156D86B.3030305@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 15:55:39 +0100

Syd's explication of what might be meant by "co-occurrence" is
interesting, but
it leaves two questions unanswered
a) does the Council, on mature reflection over the last few years,
regard the
ability to express this as a core requirement for the ODD language? my
personal
remembrance is that this sort of thing was discussed back at the start
of the TEI Council
as a good tool for the future of the TEI, but never again raised its
head formally in any meetings
of the council, or discussion on the META list, until about a month
ago. But I may well have
selective amnesia; and it might be regarded as so obvious a corollary of
the Durand Conundrum
that it didn't need explicating)
b) if Council does wish the META group to allow for this ability in
ODD, it's time
to make concrete suggestions for a notation. I freely confess that I
don't know
where to start with it!

Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Sep 26 2004 - 10:55:14 EDT

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sun Sep 26 13:15:32 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 13:15:32 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <4156D86B.3030305@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16726.63796.775333.23430@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 13:15:32 -0400

> b) if Council does wish the META group to allow for this ability
> in ODD, it's time to make concrete suggestions for a notation.
So soon? While I very much hope that the future of TEI includes the
capability to constrain documents in manners more advanced than DTDs
would allow, perhaps even using the full power of RelaxNG, I think
META has very much earned a respite from continual work on the ODD
language, and that we (Council) shouldn't start pestering you (META)
with suggested syntaxes until you've had a breather. (The term "6
months" was bantered about during the call; I took this to be
figurative, but surely you deserve more than 6 days?)
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Sep 26 2004 - 13:16:10 EDT

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Sep 26 13:29:09 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 18:29:09 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <16726.63796.775333.23430@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <4156FC65.2030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 18:29:09 +0100

Syd Bauman wrote:
>>b) if Council does wish the META group to allow for this ability
>> in ODD, it's time to make concrete suggestions for a notation.
>>
>>
>
>So soon?
>
yes. if it matters, it matters.
> While I very much hope that the future of TEI includes the
>capability to constrain documents in manners more advanced than DTDs
>would allow, perhaps even using the full power of RelaxNG, I think
>META has very much earned a respite from continual work on the ODD
>language, and that we (Council) shouldn't start pestering you (META)
>with suggested syntaxes until you've had a breather. (The term "6
>months" was bantered about during the call; I took this to be
>figurative, but surely you deserve more than 6 days?)
>
the "6 months" I thought was "3 months"; but in any case
what I meant by that was the the editors should have a guarentee
of no more changes under their feet for the prescribed period. that does
not at all preclude more work behind the scenes.
one very very simple solution is to add an attribute to saying
"this one's
a dummy because its its been hand-declared in the content of the
element". But
I don't want to go down that line of discussion unless the Council
says we ought to. Which is why I wanted a quick discussion here first.

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Sep 26 23:09:48 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:09:48 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <4156FC65.2030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:09:48 +0900

Sebastian Rahtz oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> Syd Bauman wrote:
>
>>>b) if Council does wish the META group to allow for this ability
>>> in ODD, it's time to make concrete suggestions for a notation.
>>So soon?
>>
> yes. if it matters, it matters.
Well, the reason I brought this up was mainly to have it on record. I
think we need to seriously consider the merits / de-merits of this
road, including proven need for it and its implications for the whole
of P5 etc., before we venture in this area. It does not look like we
have the ressources for this at the moment, that's why I am very happy
to have this whole issue filed until we come across a place where we
actually need it.

>> While I very much hope that the future of TEI includes the
>>capability to constrain documents in manners more advanced than DTDs
>>would allow, perhaps even using the full power of RelaxNG, I think
>>META has very much earned a respite from continual work on the ODD
>>language, and that we (Council) shouldn't start pestering you (META)
>>with suggested syntaxes until you've had a breather. (The term "6
>>months" was bantered about during the call; I took this to be
>>figurative, but surely you deserve more than 6 days?)
>>
> the "6 months" I thought was "3 months"; but in any case
> what I meant by that was the the editors should have a guarentee
> of no more changes under their feet for the prescribed period. that does
> not at all preclude more work behind the scenes.
>
> one very very simple solution is to add an attribute to saying
> "this one's
> a dummy because its its been hand-declared in the content of the
> element". But
> I don't want to go down that line of discussion unless the Council
> says we ought to. Which is why I wanted a quick discussion here first.
>
At the moment, honestly, I do not know the answer to this. The reason
we pondered this particular case of co-occurrence constraint was that
some CDATA attributes might need markup itself, so would better start
life as a child element in some circumstances. At the moment, I am
not sure if this argument still holds, since most of these CDATA
attributes should be gone now, thanks to the mechanism. Lou,
Syd, do you have any idea of which attributes might still be in need
of such a construct?

All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Sep 26 2004 - 23:09:57 EDT

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Sep 26 23:12:14 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:12:14 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:12:14 +0900

Syd Bauman edu> writes:
> [1 message body text ]
> Note: in the following I am using "or" to mean "inclusive or" and "or
> ... but not both" to mean "exclusive or", which is how I was taught
> English in grade school.
>
>> Under item 3, I think we not only discussed co-occurrence
>> constraints, but also the possibility to instantiate certain
>> attributes either as child elements or as attributes in a given
>> schema (that was on the original list of features we wanted for
>> P5). I would like to see this mentioned in the notes, so that we
>> can reference it, if the need arises.
>
> I'm not 100% sure, but I think they're the same thing. The ability to
> express in a schema that something (say the "engineType" of
> "automobile") is permitted as either an attribute or a child element
> is, of course, trivial. The difficult part, that DTDs cannot do, is
> to express that it is permitted as an attribute or a child element,
> but not both. RelaxNG permits this with a construct that I believe is
> called a "co-occurence constraint", but I'm not entirely sure that
> this phrase isn't reserved for a specific case[1].
Sorry, I guess I was dense. Yes you are right, they are the same. As
for the DTD, I think we thought this was a problem that should be
solved at compile time -- you get the DTD either with the attributes,
or with the child elements from Roma, but not both.
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Sep 26 2004 - 23:12:22 EDT

From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Mon Sep 27 09:10:13 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:10:13 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] Layout of P5 on the file system In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41581135.1070508@kantl.be>

From: Edward Vanhoutte
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:10:13 +0200

One of the items I want to bring up may seem trivial, and subject to
much discussion, but is i.m.h.o. quite important: the lay-out of the
printed version of the Guidelines. My students and staff have found the
P3 layout easier to work with than the P4 lay-out. Especially for the
reference secion in vol 2. One does occasionaly still consult the books,
and in teaching situations it's still the first physical contact with
the work of the TEI. Could we think about this (not as an item for the
conference call, but as an issue in the process of releasing P5)?
Edward
Christian Wittern wrote:
> Dear Council members,
>
> One of the issues I am pondering occasionally is how to improve the
> thorny issue of dealing with the physical files of the TEI
> Guidelines, its various Schemas, Stylesheets entities etc. I hope
> that we can find a layout of the TEI subtree on the file system,
> which makes it easier to understand, use and maintain. In this
> context, I would like to recommend to the Councils attention a
> document by the Debian XML team, which details the layout of the XML
> subsystem in Debian GNU/Linux[1] and might serve as a good starting
> point for defining our own policy.
>
> If council members would agree to this, I would like to propose to
> similarily document the structure somewhere in the Guidelines and
> implement it for P5.
>
> Comments? If no objections are raised, I will put this on the
> agenda for our next call.
>
> All the best,
>
> Christian
>
>
> [1] http://debian-xml-sgml.alioth.debian.org/xml-policy/index.html
>
-- ================ Edward Vanhoutte Co-ordinator Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies Reviews Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 edward.vanhoutte_at_kantl.be http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Sep 27 2004 - 09:09:38 EDT

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 27 10:41:26 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:41:26 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Layout of P5 on the file system In-Reply-To: <41581135.1070508@kantl.be> Message-ID: <41582696.9030001@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:41:26 +0100

Edward Vanhoutte wrote:
> One of the items I want to bring up may seem trivial, and subject to
> much discussion, but is i.m.h.o. quite important: the lay-out of the
> printed version of the Guidelines. My students and staff have found
> the P3 layout easier to work with than the P4 lay-out. Especially for
> the reference secion in vol 2. One does occasionaly still consult the
> books, and in teaching situations it's still the first physical
> contact with the work of the TEI. Could we think about this (not as an
> item for the conference call, but as an issue in the process of
> releasing P5)?
The design of the printed page for P5 has not really been considered
yet. So far as I am concerned (I consider myself the
current pumpkin holder for production of printed Guidelines), nothing is
fixed in stone at all. So any or all suggestions welcome.
But please, say much more than "easier to work with"! concrete details
are good, and alternative suggestions
even better.
If there is a group or individual who would like to consider a complete
new implementation
for making printed books, it would be great. P4 was done by an XSLT
transform to XSL FO, and then typsetting
using PassiveTeX. My current default route is XSLT transform to LaTeX
and thence TeX typsetting.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Sep 27 2004 - 10:40:52 EDT

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Sep 27 20:15:42 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 20:15:42 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16728.44334.703185.788100@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 20:15:42 -0400

> Syd, do you have any idea of which attributes might still be in
> need of such a construct?
Will try to get you an intelligent answer shortly, hopefully
tomorrow, but just too tired to function right now.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Sep 27 2004 - 20:16:23 EDT

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Tue Sep 28 04:38:13 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:38:13 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:38:13 +0900

Christian Wittern zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp> writes:
> Lou-at-home oxford.ac.uk> writes:
>
>> Now available for comment/correction at
>> http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html
>
> Thank you; this was really fast, and my apologies for not looking
> there immediately.
>
> Under item 3, I think we not only discussed co-occurrence constraints,
> but also the possibility to instantiate certain attributes either as
> child elements or as attributes in a given schema (that was on the
> original list of features we wanted for P5). I would like to see this
> mentioned in the notes, so that we can reference it, if the need
> arises.
>
Since Syd convinced me that this is in fact covered under
co-occurrence constraints, I don't think there is need to state the
above explicitly in the notes. I am happy with the minutes as they
are.
All the best,
Christian

From david.durand at ingenta.com Thu Sep 30 14:40:07 2004 From: david.durand at ingenta.com (David G. Durand) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:40:07 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <26EA9400-1310-11D9-8703-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com>

From: David G. Durand
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:40:07 -0400

Several of Syd's models seemed complicated to me.
The easy way to do this is the following:
element automobile {
( attribute engineType { "int_combustion" | "hybrid" | "electric" }
| element engineType { text }
),
text
}
For IDREFS, a model like this would work kind of nicely.
element target {
(element targets { xsd:anyURI+ } |
attribute target { xsd:anyURI } )
Actually, if we just allow the declaration of an attribute in the
declaration of an element, can't we get this? So you could just use
almost exactly the syntax above.
The explicit attribute spec could be replaced by a pattern name, for a
pattern generated by the ODD attribute list declaration, for something
like this:
element target {
(element targets { xsd:anyURI+ } |
tei.attribute.target )

not REALLY ready to propose a syntax, but it looks not as bad as it
might seem.
-- David
David G. Durand
Director, Electronic Publishing Services
Ingenta Inc.
111R Chestnut St.
Providence, RI 02903 USA
T: +1 401-331-2014 x111
T: +1 401-935-5317 Mobile
E: david.durand_at_ingenta.com
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Sep 30 2004 - 14:40:45 EDT

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Thu Sep 30 16:06:59 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:06:59 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <26EA9400-1310-11D9-8703-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Message-ID: <16732.26467.258918.531606@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:06:59 -0400

> The easy way to do this is the following:
> element automobile {
> (
> attribute engineType { "int_combustion" | "hybrid" | "electric" }
> |
> element engineType { text }
> ),
> text
> }
Right, although I think this model has the further restriction that
must precede any character data inside .

> For IDREFS, a model like this would work kind of nicely.
Right, but you misnamed the element. Also, we'd want separate
children elements, not 1 child with lots of URIs (which would be just
as hard to parse as if they were in attribute :-). So we'd want
something like
element ptr {
(
element target { xsd:anyURI }+
|
attribute target { xsd:anyURI }
)
}
And, of course, everything would have to use patterns for
indirection; and we actually use the XML syntax in the ODDs. Thus the
problem META will have to address (whether now, in "6 months", or
never), is how to resolve the below so that the second
in the points to it, and it is not instantiated
elsewhere.

specifies the destination of the pointer by supplying a
single URI Reference. If there is more than one target, no
target attribute should be specified, and instead
a series of two or more target child elements should
be used.

A single URI Reference; may use the TEI XPointer schemes.

Mind you I have no idea whether or not this implementable.
Furthermore, I have not thought about what we'd do with usage= of
.
BTW, I'd be perfectly happy if for every "normal" TEI element X
(i.e., those for which we do not want to take advantage of
co-occurence constraints) we needed to specify

somewhere inside its if it made this workable.

I'm begining to think I should have posted this to the META list
instead ... in fact, I'll cross-post it there, and if we want to
continue this technical discussion I suggest we move it there.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Sep 30 2004 - 16:07:39 EDT

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Fri Oct 1 02:15:52 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 15:15:52 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Report of the Council to the Members at MM04 Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 15:15:52 +0900

Dear Councillors,
As previously announced, I am compiling a report of the Council
activities during this past year.

This report will be based on the submissions I receive from Council
members, so please do sent me some notes. While notes from every
member are welcome, chairpersons of workgroups, taskforces and the
like are required to report on their Activities. This report is part
of how we explain to the Members, who pay for TEI activities, how well
their money has been spent, and ideally should also be suitable for
fund-raising activities. I therefore strongly encourage all of you to
send me some inspiring notes of what you did in TEI land during the
past 12 months.
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Fri Oct 01 2004 - 02:16:02 EDT

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sat Oct 2 23:39:53 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 23:39:53 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] SO issues, before the deadline! Message-ID: <16735.29833.522760.816488@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 23:39:53 -0400

As actioned on the previous conference call, David and I have updated
the "issues" document from the Stand-off Markup WG (with no voiced
objections from WG members). In particular, sections have been added
to address the issues "referred back to the WG" in Ghent:
* the name of the main pointing attribute (target=), and
* how to handle what in P4 are IDREFS (whitespace separated URIs)
and the discussion of the new XPointer schemes the Guidelines will be
defining has been greatly expanded.
It would be really a good thing if every Councilor could read the
entire document (it's not all that long) and express either agreement
or suggested improvements within the next few days. If you can't read
the whole thing, at least read the sections "Changes to Attributes",
"Replacing IDREFS", and "Proposed additions to W3C Pointing schemes"
and respond to the first two ASAP, preferably by Monday afternoon.
It is available at
http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.xml
http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html
In addition, the current draft of SA is available as
http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow03.xml, but unless you're very
curious, I wouldn't waste time with it yet, as David and I are still
actively working on it. Hope to have a ready-for-first-look version
up very soon, most likely Mon or Tue.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sat Oct 02 2004 - 23:40:32 EDT

From Laurent.Romary at loria.fr Sun Oct 3 05:38:06 2004 From: Laurent.Romary at loria.fr (Laurent Romary) Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:38:06 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] SO issues, before the deadline! In-Reply-To: <16735.29833.522760.816488@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID:

From: Laurent Romary
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:38:06 +0200

This seems to be a comprehensive set of proposals, which I would really
suggest to stabilize for a while (in the same spirit as we decided to
freeze the ODD mechanisms), so that we can, in particular, communicate
widely on this to have a feedback from the TEI community at large (cf.
TEI MM). My only 20 euroCents is that I agree to have a heterogeneous
addressing system, i.e. I also feel at ease with the 1-origin
addressing scheme for match.
Best
Laurent
Le 3 oct. 04, ? 05:39, Syd Bauman a ?crit :
> As actioned on the previous conference call, David and I have updated
> the "issues" document from the Stand-off Markup WG (with no voiced
> objections from WG members). In particular, sections have been added
> to address the issues "referred back to the WG" in Ghent:
> * the name of the main pointing attribute (target=), and
> * how to handle what in P4 are IDREFS (whitespace separated URIs)
> and the discussion of the new XPointer schemes the Guidelines will be
> defining has been greatly expanded.
>
> It would be really a good thing if every Councilor could read the
> entire document (it's not all that long) and express either agreement
> or suggested improvements within the next few days. If you can't read
> the whole thing, at least read the sections "Changes to Attributes",
> "Replacing IDREFS", and "Proposed additions to W3C Pointing schemes"
> and respond to the first two ASAP, preferably by Monday afternoon.
>
> It is available at
> http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.xml
> http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html
>
> In addition, the current draft of SA is available as
> http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow03.xml, but unless you're very
> curious, I wouldn't waste time with it yet, as David and I are still
> actively working on it. Hope to have a ready-for-first-look version
> up very soon, most likely Mon or Tue.
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Oct 03 2004 - 09:02:33 EDT

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Oct 3 19:05:49 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 08:05:49 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] SO issues, before the deadline! In-Reply-To: <16735.29833.522760.816488@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 08:05:49 +0900

Dear Syd, Dear David,
Thanks for providing this document. I briefly read through it and did
not immediately discover any problems. The handling of IDREFS looks
now reasonable to me, much better than curly braces.
All the best,
Christian
Syd Bauman edu> writes:
> As actioned on the previous conference call, David and I have updated
> the "issues" document from the Stand-off Markup WG (with no voiced
> objections from WG members). In particular, sections have been added
> to address the issues "referred back to the WG" in Ghent:
> * the name of the main pointing attribute (target=), and
> * how to handle what in P4 are IDREFS (whitespace separated URIs)
> and the discussion of the new XPointer schemes the Guidelines will be
> defining has been greatly expanded.
>
> It would be really a good thing if every Councilor could read the
> entire document (it's not all that long) and express either agreement
> or suggested improvements within the next few days. If you can't read
> the whole thing, at least read the sections "Changes to Attributes",
> "Replacing IDREFS", and "Proposed additions to W3C Pointing schemes"
> and respond to the first two ASAP, preferably by Monday afternoon.
>
> It is available at
> http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.xml
> http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html
>
> In addition, the current draft of SA is available as
> http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow03.xml, but unless you're very
> curious, I wouldn't waste time with it yet, as David and I are still
> actively working on it. Hope to have a ready-for-first-look version
> up very soon, most likely Mon or Tue.
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Oct 03 2004 - 19:05:59 EDT

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Tue Oct 5 00:04:12 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 13:04:12 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Council report (reminder) Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 13:04:12 +0900

Dear Councilors,
Please send reports of your TEI related activity to me (at
wittern_at_kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp) immediately for inclusion in the
Council report to the TEI Members Meeting.
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Tue Oct 05 2004 - 00:04:23 EDT

From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Tue Oct 12 09:40:21 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:40:21 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies Message-ID:

From: Julia Flanders
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:40:21 -0400

Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to
TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly
there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please
post any objections ASAP.
--Julia
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Oct 12 2004 - 09:41:04 EDT

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Tue Oct 12 09:41:11 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:41:11 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <416BDEF7.1000105@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:41:11 +0100

Julia Flanders wrote:
> Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to
> TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly
> there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please
> post any objections ASAP.
on the contrary, seems an excellent plan. if we have any money and they
do anything,
they'd be a good candidate to upgrade into a full-scale working group
ebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Oct 12 2004 - 09:43:51 EDT

From nsmith at email.unc.edu Tue Oct 12 09:44:49 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:44:49 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: Message-ID:

From: Natasha Smith
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:44:49 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)

I heartily approve this proposal. I found it extremely timely (and meets
our own interests here at UNC :-)
best, ns
Natasha (Natalia) Smith
Digitization Librarian
Wilson Library, CB#3990
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Chapel Hill, NC 27514-8890
email: natalia_smith_at_unc.edu
tel. (919) 962-9590
fax (919) 962-4452
http://docsouth.unc.edu/

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Julia Flanders wrote:
> Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to
> TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly
> there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please
> post any objections ASAP.
>
> --Julia
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Oct 12 2004 - 09:46:45 EDT

From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Tue Oct 12 10:05:58 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:05:58 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: <[tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies> Message-ID: <200410121457.i9CEvo2a014551@relay.hostbasket.com>

From: Edward Vanhoutte
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:05:58 +0200

No objections whatsoever. Timely proposal and important work.
Edward

> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Julia Flanders wrote:
>
> > Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to
> > TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly
> > there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please
> > post any objections ASAP.
> >
> > --Julia
> > _______________________________________________
> > tei-council mailing list
> > tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
================
Edward Vanhoutte
Coordinator
Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL)
Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies
Reviews Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing
Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde
Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature
Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium
tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49
edward.vanhoutte_at_kantl.be
http://www.kantl.be/ctb/
http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/
http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm

From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Tue Oct 12 10:06:03 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:06:03 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: <[tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies> Message-ID: <200410121457.i9CEvt2a014560@relay.hostbasket.com>

From: Edward Vanhoutte
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:06:03 +0200

No objections whatsoever. Timely proposal and important work.
Edward

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Tue Oct 12 19:03:35 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 08:03:35 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 08:03:35 +0900

Julia Flanders edu> writes:
> Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to
> TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly
> there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please
> post any objections ASAP.
Looks very interesting, lets approve it.
All the best,
Christian

From Laurent.Romary at loria.fr Wed Oct 13 03:07:10 2004 From: Laurent.Romary at loria.fr (Laurent Romary) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:07:10 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <80562A6C-1CE6-11D9-A9B0-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr>

From: Laurent Romary
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:07:10 +0200

This proposal is OK, but should probably not limit its scope to just
CRM. It is a general issue for P5 in particular to a) relate the
description of elements to external sources that may provide a better
semantic for them and b) import external description in complement to
what P5 offers.
Other sources maybe things llike the LOM (for education) the TC 37 DCR
(linguistic concepts), OLAC-IMDI (metadata (cf. header)), etc.
Laurent

Le 12 oct. 04, ? 15:40, Julia Flanders a ?crit :
> Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to
> TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly
> there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please
> post any objections ASAP.
>
> --Julia
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Wed Oct 13 2004 - 03:01:19 EDT

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Wed Oct 13 04:30:01 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:30:01 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: <80562A6C-1CE6-11D9-A9B0-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr> Message-ID: <416CE789.5060808@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:30:01 +0100

This is a SIG, right? so I don't think it's for the council to tell it
what to do. If SIG members eventually decide to propose a workgroup,
then the Council certainly should be involved, but at this stage I
didn't think the council needs do more than say "good luck"!
That said, I certainly agree with Laurent that we ought to be looking in
P5 at ways of expanding on our current "gesture" towards providing
interoperability with other ontologies. is only a start....
My recollection is that the original posting also suggested that Oyvind
at least wants to provide input to a proposed TEI module for
prosopographic elements. It's probably a good idea to keep the two
things distinct.
However both these issues can be discussed better face to face when the
SIG meets!

Laurent Romary wrote:
> This proposal is OK, but should probably not limit its scope to just
> CRM. It is a general issue for P5 in particular to a) relate the
> description of elements to external sources that may provide a better
> semantic for them and b) import external description in complement to
> what P5 offers.
> Other sources maybe things llike the LOM (for education) the TC 37 DCR
> (linguistic concepts), OLAC-IMDI (metadata (cf. header)), etc.
> Laurent
>
>
> Le 12 oct. 04, ? 15:40, Julia Flanders a ?crit :
>
>> Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to
>> TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly
>> there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please
>> post any objections ASAP.
>>
>> --Julia
>> _______________________________________________
>> tei-council mailing list
>> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
>

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Oct 14 00:04:37 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:04:37 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Council report Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:04:37 +0900

Dear colleagues,
>From the feedback I got on my call and from memory etc, I have
compiled a report for the Members Meeting, which Lou has massaged a
bit and put up at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcr02.{x,ht}ml
Please look at it! I assume that a sudden desire to improve this
("no, we can't possibly show it to the members like it is now!") will
arise. Please send your imrprovements directly to Lou.
I am also not sure about the last section -- it is there because it
was there last year, but the report could do without it IMHO. If you
want it to be there, we certainly will need a bit more input.

All the best,
Christian

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Oct 14 05:22:55 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:22:55 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Council report In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <416E456F.5060209@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:22:55 +0100

I've already received a bit of additional input for the last section
(thanks Edward!) which I personally found both interesting and
informative -- how many other council members were aware that there was
an excellent article introducing the TEI in a recent issue of LLC? -- so
I'd like to encourage all of you to contribute a short list of what
you've personally done for the TEI since taking up your position on the
council. I think it's important to remember that the Council has an
important role as the ultimate arbiter of the technical content of the
TEI, and its members should therefore all be seen to be actively engaged
in its development. It's not a competiton -- we all have conflicting
demands on our time -- but I'm sure also that most of you have
*something* to report.
Anyway, I am happy to go on hacking bulleted lists into the report up
until end-of-Monday next week (my time!)
best wishes
Lou

Christian Wittern wrote:
>Dear colleagues,
>
>>From the feedback I got on my call and from memory etc, I have
>compiled a report for the Members Meeting, which Lou has massaged a
>bit and put up at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcr02.{x,ht}ml
>
>Please look at it! I assume that a sudden desire to improve this
>("no, we can't possibly show it to the members like it is now!") will
>arise. Please send your imrprovements directly to Lou.
>
>I am also not sure about the last section -- it is there because it
>was there last year, but the report could do without it IMHO. If you
>want it to be there, we certainly will need a bit more input.
>
>
>All the best,
>
>Christian
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Oct 14 2004 - 05:25:15 EDT

From alex.bia at ua.es Thu Oct 14 12:59:16 2004 From: alex.bia at ua.es (Alejandro Bia) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:59:16 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041014185816.043bfba0@aitana.cpd.ua.es>

From: Alejandro Bia
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:59:16 +0200

It's an excellent initiative. I firmly support it.
Alex.-
At 15:40 12/10/2004, Julia Flanders wrote:
>Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to
>TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly
>there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please post
>any objections ASAP.
>
>--Julia
>_______________________________________________
>tei-council mailing list
>tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
---------------------------------------------------------
ALEJANDRO BIA-PLATAS
e-mail: alex.bia_at_ua.es
Departamento de Estad?stica y Matem?tica Aplicada
Universidad Miguel Hern?ndez
Edificio Torretamarit
Avenida de la Universidad s/n, E-03202, Elche, ESPA?A
http://www.umh.es/
Tel: +34 966658542
Fax: +34 966658715
abia_at_umh.es
Tel?fono m?vil: +34 610806427
---------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Oct 14 2004 - 13:09:50 EDT

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Oct 21 19:12:45 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:12:45 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Cancelled trip to Baltimore due to Taifun Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:12:45 +0900

Dear Julia,
As you might have heard in the news, a desastrous taifun has hit Japan
in the past days. The eye passed right over Kansai Airport at the
time I was supposed to leave for Baltimore, so the plane got diverted
and I was told to wait. Unfortunately, weather conditions did not
improve and I finally had to return home (which was no small task
either) and wait for further notice. As it turned out, the flight was
not cancelled, but "only" delayed by more then 24 hours. This,
however, would prevent me from arriving in Baltimore in time for the
meeting, so I had to give up on the trip. Fortunately, although even a few
miles from here homes collapsed in landslides, family and friends in Japan
are all unaffected.
I would like to ask you to apologize on my behalf to the members at
the meeting in Baltimore. I am very sorry that, as the chair of the
technical council of the TEI, I have to miss such an important
opportunity to get feedback from the TEI community and think about
further directions, especially at a time when such important decisions
about the further directions of the development of the TEI Guidelines
have to be made. I trust that the meeting will be one of the rare
opportunities of exchange between communities and individuals that are
at other times separated by barriers of time, space and habit and hope
that the fruits of this meeting will soon be visible in TEI land.
All the best,
Christian Wittern
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Thu Oct 21 2004 - 19:14:13 EDT

From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Sun Oct 24 22:49:14 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Flanders, Julia) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 22:49:14 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] RE: Cancelled trip to Baltimore due to Taifun Message-ID: <1A97D3D73A03FC419D87967D3CE4760C4BC911@MAIL1.AD.Brown.Edu>

From: Flanders, Julia
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 22:49:14 -0400

Dear Christian,
We were all glad to receive your email, as evidence that you were safe, and also very sorry to hear that you could not attend the meeting. You were very much missed. In your absence we displayed the photo of you in the airport, and Sebastian did a good job of presenting the council report and fielding questions. I won't attempt to summarize the various forms of feedback we received, but I'm sure that they will be reported on in due time by the editors and council members who were present.
Best wishes on behalf of all of us--Julia

-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Wittern [mailto:wittern_at_kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp]
Sent: Thu 10/21/04 19:12
To: Flanders, Julia
Cc: tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
Subject: Cancelled trip to Baltimore due to Taifun

Dear Julia,
As you might have heard in the news, a desastrous taifun has hit Japan
in the past days. The eye passed right over Kansai Airport at the
time I was supposed to leave for Baltimore, so the plane got diverted
and I was told to wait. Unfortunately, weather conditions did not
improve and I finally had to return home (which was no small task
either) and wait for further notice. As it turned out, the flight was
not cancelled, but "only" delayed by more then 24 hours. This,
however, would prevent me from arriving in Baltimore in time for the
meeting, so I had to give up on the trip. Fortunately, although even a few
miles from here homes collapsed in landslides, family and friends in Japan
are all unaffected.
I would like to ask you to apologize on my behalf to the members at
the meeting in Baltimore. I am very sorry that, as the chair of the
technical council of the TEI, I have to miss such an important
opportunity to get feedback from the TEI community and think about
further directions, especially at a time when such important decisions
about the further directions of the development of the TEI Guidelines
have to be made. I trust that the meeting will be one of the rare
opportunities of exchange between communities and individuals that are
at other times separated by barriers of time, space and habit and hope
that the fruits of this meeting will soon be visible in TEI land.
All the best,
Christian Wittern
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Oct 24 2004 - 22:50:56 EDT

From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Tue Oct 26 12:55:27 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:55:27 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] new TEI Council members Message-ID:

From: Julia Flanders
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:55:27 -0400

I am happy to announce that in the recent TEI election, the following
people were elected or re-elected to the TEI council:
Alejandro Bia
James Cummings
Susan Schreibman
John Walsh
Their terms begin on January 1, 2005 and end on December 31, 2006.
The new members have been added to the Council listserv immediately
so that they can listen and participate in discussion, but they will
not vote until their terms officially begin.
Welcome, James and John, and welcome back, Alex, and Susan!
best wishes, Julia
Julia Flanders
Chair, TEI Consortium
Brown University
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Oct 26 2004 - 12:56:05 EDT

From Laurent.Romary at loria.fr Fri Nov 5 13:27:30 2004 From: Laurent.Romary at loria.fr (Laurent Romary) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 19:27:30 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Compound Document Formats Message-ID: <5AAAE2FE-2F58-11D9-806D-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr>

From: Laurent Romary
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 19:27:30 +0100

Dear all,
Is there any one of us keeping track of the work intiated in W3C on
compound document formats (http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/)? There could be
some cross-fertilization with the kind of recommendation we want to put
in P5 on mixing document models (e.g. TEI+SVG+MathML; TEI+Docbook,
etc.)
Best
Laurent
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sat Nov 06 2004 - 02:22:35 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 7 16:10:54 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 21:10:54 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Compound Document Formats In-Reply-To: <5AAAE2FE-2F58-11D9-806D-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr> Message-ID: <418E8F5E.2080009@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 21:10:54 +0000

They'll probably produce a W3C-centric view of the world only (ie XHTML
is king, W3C schema is only
recommended way foward etc)
but I agree, it would be interesting to see the insides of the
discussion. is anyone here a W3C member?
ebastian

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 7 18:07:21 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 08:07:21 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] new TEI Council members In-Reply-To: Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 08:07:21 +0900

Dear Council members,
I would like to extend my welcome to the new members, James and John
and to the reelected members Alejandro and Susan! This seems like a
very good mixture between continuity and change and I am looking
forward to work with you! And I would like to thank David Birnbaum
and David Durand for devoting their time and energy to the work here
on the Council, which has been much appreciated.
The TEI Council is doing most of its business via this list or
conference calls, in recent years we did have one face to face meeting
a year, that happened to be in May on the last occasions. Our next
conference call is scheduled for Nov. 29, 1300 UTC. -- The
information about the call is outdated, Perry used to host the calls
when he was in Indiana, then David Durand took over hosting them. I
will post call information together with the agenda here a week or so
before the call. BTW, it looks like we have to look for a new host next
year, with David rotating off the Council.
On the TEI website at http://www.tei-c.org/Council are some pages with
minutes and other information about the work of the council.
All the best,
Christian Wittern

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 7 18:16:19 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 23:16:19 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] new TEI Council members In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <418EACC3.3080400@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 23:16:19 +0000

It might be appropriate to start considering how to spend
the relatively limited funds we have for meetings. Do we want
a May meeting in 2005? does anyone want to host it, if so?
which work groups want to meet?
There is, I would argue, a relatively urgent need to finance
a meeting to manage an overhaul of the TEI class system
before too long. If that was classed, for the sake of argument,
as a META meeting, it would be one lien on the funds. More bids?

Sebastian

From nsmith at email.unc.edu Wed Nov 10 13:12:45 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:12:45 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [tei-council] Fwd: Some things never change... (fwd) Message-ID:

From: Natasha Smith
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:12:45 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)

i thought you might enjoy and weep with us all...
An image with the 2004 election voting pattern map beside a pre-civil
war
free vs. slave states map.

and
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14832124&method=full&siteid=50143&headline=god-help-america-name_page.html

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Nov 11 12:15:53 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:15:53 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing Message-ID: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:15:53 +0000

The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I think)
accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced by a global
xml:lang attribute; likewise the Standoff WG has proposed and the
Council is (I think) still ruminating about the notion that the global
"id" attribute should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute.
Pondering how to actually implement these proposals in P5 without
causing too much havoc, I have reached the conclusion that it would be
both feasible and advisable to make the transition in a rather more
cautious way. I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to lang
in the definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a
replacement for it. (And similarly xml:lang). By "alternative" here I
mean that a given element can specify one or the other but not both
(supplying both would in any case be impossible since both have ID
declared values). The current ODD syntax already supports this -- we
added it art Christian's suggestion during the Paris Meta meeting -- and
indeed uses it for similar backwards- compatibility-reasons in the
definition for

I think. The schemas generated do exactly the
same thing: the DTD generated may need some further hand adjustment.
I think it is a good idea to hedge our bets about the take up of W3C
recommendations in this way, and it will definitely make the job of
moving legacy data to P5 a whole lot easier. Not least for us!
Comments?
Lou
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Nov 11 2004 - 12:19:40 EST

From djbpitt+tei at pitt.edu Thu Nov 11 13:50:57 2004 From: djbpitt+tei at pitt.edu (David J Birnbaum) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:50:57 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <1397898621.1100181057@birnbaum.slavic.pitt.edu>

From: David J Birnbaum
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:50:57 -0500

Dear Lou (cc Council),
I apologize if I've forgotten some important explanatory detail, but I
don't understand the advantage of hedging our bets here. Can you elaborate
a bit?
Thanks,
David
--On Thursday, November 11, 2004 5:15 PM +0000 Lou Burnard

oxford.ac.uk> wrote:r
> The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I think)
> accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced by a global
> xml:lang attribute; likewise the Standoff WG has proposed and the Council
> is (I think) still ruminating about the notion that the global "id"
> attribute should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute.
>
> Pondering how to actually implement these proposals in P5 without causing
> too much havoc, I have reached the conclusion that it would be both
> feasible and advisable to make the transition in a rather more cautious
> way. I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to lang in the
> definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a replacement for
> it. (And similarly xml:lang). By "alternative" here I mean that a given
> element can specify one or the other but not both (supplying both would
> in any case be impossible since both have ID declared values). The
> current ODD syntax already supports this -- we added it art Christian's
> suggestion during the Paris Meta meeting -- and indeed uses it for
> similar backwards- compatibility-reasons in the definition for

I
> think. The schemas generated do exactly the same thing: the DTD generated
> may need some further hand adjustment.
>
> I think it is a good idea to hedge our bets about the take up of W3C
> recommendations in this way, and it will definitely make the job of
> moving legacy data to P5 a whole lot easier. Not least for us!
>
> Comments?
>
> Lou
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council

________
Professor David J. Birnbaum
Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures
1417 Cathedral of Learning
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA
Voice: 1 412 624 5712
Fax: 1 412 624 9714
Email: djbpitt+@pitt.edu
URL: http://clover.slavic.pitt.edu/~djb/
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Nov 11 2004 - 13:51:50 EST

From david.durand at ingenta.com Thu Nov 11 15:16:38 2004 From: david.durand at ingenta.com (David G. Durand) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:16:38 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <97B649F8-341E-11D9-813B-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com>

From: David G. Durand
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:16:38 -0500

I'm assuming that I'm still a council member until the end of the
calendar year...
I don't like this idea at all, nor the one (apparently) discussed at
the TEI members' meeting. As roughly described to me second-hand, it
seems to have been a proposal that we should rename elements and
attributes changed as to function in P5 so that it will be easier to
extend P4 by the re-addition of p4 elements that have been replaced by
newer functions/notations in P5.
We shouldn't (and can't under our own rules) prevent people from using
any tagging practices we want, but I don't think we should "ease
migration" in a way that allows existing P4 documents to become P5
documents without updating the markup. There's no shame at staying with
P4 if that suits one's needs. The decision to allow non-compatible
changes is a good one in that it enables things to be cleaned up
without constraint as to compatibility, and that's a good thing, I
think. Renaming things just to make using the old names easier is bad
because it makes the new names less useful, and the whole issue of
support _more_ complicated.
In the XML committee we had a slogan of not being "gratuitously
incompatible" with SGML, and in that situation the need for backward
compatibility seemed much stronger. I'd also note that XML itself could
have been more incompatible without serious problems, as things turned
out.
I don't really see how it helps in moving legacy data: for xml:id, you
have to add a '#'. For xml:lang you have to make up a table converting
whatever strings you used in your TEI "lang" to the standard strings as
defined by the ISO and W3C.
P5 is going to have to go through a process of acceptance and tool
building (as previous versions have) and the center of gravity will
slowly shift to the newer version, as people so the work of conversion.
People will have to compare the effort of touching old data and
shifting their tool environment, versus staying with the old markup and
foregoing the improvements of P5, or the duplicated effort if they
maintain data in both formats and thus have to deal with two separate
tool chains. Granted this can be a hard decision to make, and will
certainly involve some extra work if one wants to use new P5 features
or tools, but it seems to me that that's the reality of this kind of
work.
I'd be more sympathetic if I thought that people _had_ to move to the
new world, but they can linger on the margins of P4 as long as they
want. They can even add stuff from P5 into P4 if they want to.
If we're to make a break (and we've decided that long ago), I say that
it should be a clean break, with no guilty half-measures or apologies.
-- David
On Nov 11, 2004, at 12:15 PM, Lou Burnard wrote:
> The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I think)
> accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced by a
> global xml:lang attribute; likewise the Standoff WG has proposed and
> the Council is (I think) still ruminating about the notion that the
> global "id" attribute should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute.
>
> Pondering how to actually implement these proposals in P5 without
> causing too much havoc, I have reached the conclusion that it would be
> both feasible and advisable to make the transition in a rather more
> cautious way. I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to
> lang in the definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a
> replacement for it. (And similarly xml:lang). By "alternative" here I
> mean that a given element can specify one or the other but not both
> (supplying both would in any case be impossible since both have ID
> declared values). The current ODD syntax already supports this -- we
> added it art Christian's suggestion during the Paris Meta meeting --
> and indeed uses it for similar backwards- compatibility-reasons in the
> definition for

I think. The schemas generated do exactly the
> same thing: the DTD generated may need some further hand adjustment.
>
> I think it is a good idea to hedge our bets about the take up of W3C
> recommendations in this way, and it will definitely make the job of
> moving legacy data to P5 a whole lot easier. Not least for us!
>
> Comments?
>
> Lou
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
>
David G. Durand
Director, Electronic Publishing Services
Ingenta Inc.
111R Chestnut St.
Providence, RI 02903 USA
T: +1 401-331-2014 x111
T: +1 401-935-5317 Mobile
E: david.durand_at_ingenta.com
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Nov 11 2004 - 15:17:16 EST

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Nov 11 17:22:50 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:22:50 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <97B649F8-341E-11D9-813B-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Message-ID: <4193E63A.5090502@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:22:50 +0000

Hi David
I hope you'll continue giving us your views even after you cease to be a
council member!
The idea of the P4 compatibility module presented to the TEI members
meeting is not the point at issue here, and it's a somewhat irrelevant
rhetorical move to conflate the two. Although it's true that I might
advance some similar arguments in favour of producing a compatibility
module to those I will advance in favour of the "retain id and lang"
proposal, that doesn't mean that they're the same point, and in any case
I don't think they're the only arguments. And I'm NOT in fact proposing
a compatibility module at this point.
As I understand it, the argument for replacing "lang" with "xml:lang" is
fundamentally that the latter has been recommended by W3C with a
semantics more or less identical to that identified by the TEI for
"lang". The argument goes on to assert that any new software likely to
be developed will pay more attention to W3C recommendations than to TEI
ones and that we should therefore go with the majority. I don't disagree
with that recommendation entirely (though I seem to recall that the CE
workgroup wasn't unanimous on this point -- Espen in particular was
quite strongly against it): my suggestion is not that we should try to
keep lang to the exclusion of xml:lang. Rather it is that we should
allow for a transitional period in which existing TEI software which
does understand and use "lang" in exactly the same way that software yet
to be constructed will presumably use "xml:lang" should continue to be
usable in the new regime. It's more about software than data: as you
correctly point out, legacy data may need to be changed anyway if it
doesn't use the right language identifiers. But not all of it needs to
be changed, and it surely can't be a bad idea to make transition to P5
less of an obstacle if we can do so.
It's all very well to say we'll go on supporting P4 and people can stick
with that if they like, but there are a lot of good things in P5 that
will never be retrofitted to P4! The new module system, the new ODDs,
the improvements in the core modules, the new modules like MS and gaiji
-- these are things we want people to start using now, and which the TEI
community wants to take up. So I think we ought to try at least a little
to be more accomodating, where we can do so without too much effort or
confusion. My suggestion is that allowing for the old names to subsist,
as alternates for the new ones, buys us a lot in terms of lowering the
entry price, at virtually no additional cost in maintaining duplicate
tool chains. OK, new tools have to allow for either lang or xml:lang
and have to process them identically. But that's it.
The case with id and xml:id seems more or less the same to me. The point
you make about having to change the values of this attribute in legacy
data seems mistaken: surely the new version of id="foo" is xml:id="foo",
not xml:id="#foo"? Where data has to change is in the value of the
"target" attribute surely? In which case I'd also like to put on the
agenda for the discussion the possibly heretical suggestion that we
might choose to *retain* target="foo" (for the benefit of legacy systems
that understand ID/IDREF) as an alternative for url="#foo" (or whatever
its name is to be). Note however that I'm not suggesting that we should
also attempt to retain the whole baggage of the TEI extended pointer
syntax, etc. -- just that we keep the ability to use the
shedloads of existing tools which use target and id in anticipation of
the great dawn of xlink-aware software that is just around the
corner.... (still)
Lou

David G. Durand wrote:
> I'm assuming that I'm still a council member until the end of the
> calendar year...
>
> I don't like this idea at all, nor the one (apparently) discussed at the
> TEI members' meeting. As roughly described to me second-hand, it seems
> to have been a proposal that we should rename elements and attributes
> changed as to function in P5 so that it will be easier to extend P4 by
> the re-addition of p4 elements that have been replaced by newer
> functions/notations in P5.
>
> We shouldn't (and can't under our own rules) prevent people from using
> any tagging practices we want, but I don't think we should "ease
> migration" in a way that allows existing P4 documents to become P5
> documents without updating the markup. There's no shame at staying with
> P4 if that suits one's needs. The decision to allow non-compatible
> changes is a good one in that it enables things to be cleaned up without
> constraint as to compatibility, and that's a good thing, I think.
> Renaming things just to make using the old names easier is bad because
> it makes the new names less useful, and the whole issue of support
> _more_ complicated.
>
> In the XML committee we had a slogan of not being "gratuitously
> incompatible" with SGML, and in that situation the need for backward
> compatibility seemed much stronger. I'd also note that XML itself could
> have been more incompatible without serious problems, as things turned out.
>
> I don't really see how it helps in moving legacy data: for xml:id, you
> have to add a '#'. For xml:lang you have to make up a table converting
> whatever strings you used in your TEI "lang" to the standard strings as
> defined by the ISO and W3C.
>
> P5 is going to have to go through a process of acceptance and tool
> building (as previous versions have) and the center of gravity will
> slowly shift to the newer version, as people so the work of conversion.
>
> People will have to compare the effort of touching old data and shifting
> their tool environment, versus staying with the old markup and foregoing
> the improvements of P5, or the duplicated effort if they maintain data
> in both formats and thus have to deal with two separate tool chains.
> Granted this can be a hard decision to make, and will certainly involve
> some extra work if one wants to use new P5 features or tools, but it
> seems to me that that's the reality of this kind of work.
>
> I'd be more sympathetic if I thought that people _had_ to move to the
> new world, but they can linger on the margins of P4 as long as they
> want. They can even add stuff from P5 into P4 if they want to.
>
> If we're to make a break (and we've decided that long ago), I say that
> it should be a clean break, with no guilty half-measures or apologies.
>
> -- David
>
> On Nov 11, 2004, at 12:15 PM, Lou Burnard wrote:
>
>> The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I think)
>> accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced by a
>> global xml:lang attribute; likewise the Standoff WG has proposed and
>> the Council is (I think) still ruminating about the notion that the
>> global "id" attribute should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute.
>>
>> Pondering how to actually implement these proposals in P5 without
>> causing too much havoc, I have reached the conclusion that it would be
>> both feasible and advisable to make the transition in a rather more
>> cautious way. I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to
>> lang in the definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a
>> replacement for it. (And similarly xml:lang). By "alternative" here I
>> mean that a given element can specify one or the other but not both
>> (supplying both would in any case be impossible since both have ID
>> declared values). The current ODD syntax already supports this -- we
>> added it art Christian's suggestion during the Paris Meta meeting --
>> and indeed uses it for similar backwards- compatibility-reasons in the
>> definition for

I think. The schemas generated do exactly the
>> same thing: the DTD generated may need some further hand adjustment.
>>
>> I think it is a good idea to hedge our bets about the take up of W3C
>> recommendations in this way, and it will definitely make the job of
>> moving legacy data to P5 a whole lot easier. Not least for us!
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>> Lou
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tei-council mailing list
>> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>>
>>
>
> David G. Durand
> Director, Electronic Publishing Services
> Ingenta Inc.
> 111R Chestnut St.
> Providence, RI 02903 USA
>
> T: +1 401-331-2014 x111
> T: +1 401-935-5317 Mobile
> E: david.durand_at_ingenta.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Nov 11 19:29:04 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:29:04 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] to id or not to id Message-ID: <419403D0.7020300@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:29:04 +0000

One could argue that the core should remain pure, and have only xml:id
and xml:lang. But that a P4 compatibility
module could introduce the @id/@xml:id choice. This would have the
advantage that P5 users who wanted to
work in this way would have to be more explicit about it, by adding a
new module to their portfolio.
I find it hard to decide which way I want to vote on this, I must say.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Thu Nov 11 2004 - 18:29:55 EST

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Thu Nov 11 18:45:28 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:45:28 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:45:28 -0500

> The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I
> think) accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced
> by a global xml:lang attribute;
I don't believe Council has approved this; at least, the minutes
don't reflect any such decision.

> ... the Standoff WG has proposed and the Council is (I think)
> still ruminating about the notion that the global "id" attribute
> should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute.
Council explicitly approved replacing id= with xml:id= at the 2004-05
meeting in Ghent.

> I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to lang in the
> definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a replacement
> for it. (And similarly xml:lang).
This seems like it could be quite problematic for anyone trying to
write software that could do something intelligent with unmodified
TEI P5 files. With this proposal authors of such software would need
to be able to process
* ID/IDREF using id=, and
* XPointers using xml:id=, and
* lang= pointing to via ID/IDREF, and
* xml:lang= being an RFC 3066 (or successor) language tag &
potentially pointing to via ident=
Seems a bit scary. In addition, if I use one methodology and you use
the other, we've got yet another barrier to interchange.

> I think it is a good idea to hedge our bets about the take up of
> W3C recommendations in this way,
I'm not entirely sure why. It's not as if there are dozens of
processing systems out there that can do the right thing with lang=,
but won't be able to handle xml:lang=. Same for id=, really, with the
obvious exception of validators.
We didn't hedge any bets about the take up of RelaxNG, and it doesn't
have a multinational cartel -- I mean consortium -- of software
companies backing it.
Of course, if it's IP issues you're concerned with ... sigh.

> and it will definitely make the job of moving legacy data to P5 a
> whole lot easier.
My first reaction was "no it won't", but that's not true. It could,
at least for the case of xml:lang=.
For xml:id=, I can't imagine that there won't be software to perform
instance conversion. Heck, if your project has constrained its data
such that an equals sign ("=") is not permitted except when used as a
VI, the IDREF -> XPointer conversion can be done with a one-line Perl
script[1]. (IDREFS is a little harder.) Even for those projects that
do use "=" in places other than as a VI (i.e., in content, attribute
values, comments, PIs, and CDATA marked sections), it can't be that
difficult an XSLT stylesheet, can it? Perhaps my low level of mastery
of XSLT is shining through here, but especially in XSLT2 such a thing
should be reasonably easy, no?
However, if this "choice of lang= or xml:lang= but not both" proposal
is not adopted, then those converting legacy data will have to go
about creating a look-up table that will convert their local lang=
values (which are by definition arbitrary IDREFs) into xml:lang=
values (which will be by definition RFC 3066 or its successor
language tags). While many many projects will be able to create a
single table capable of being used for all their P4 files, it is
conceivable that a different look-up table would need to be created
for each instance to be converted. Could be a pain.
Of course, many projects actually deliberately choose to use RFC 3066
language tags as the value of id= of (and thus of lang=)
already, and thus wouldn't have to do anything special.

The main problem I foresee pertains to people who have stretched the
meaning of "language" a wee bit, and have things like

and

in their files.

> Not least for us!
Who's us? While the TEI-C certainly has lots of data lying around in
P4 format, is there a strong reason to migrate it all to P5? It
appears we have a history of leaving things in older formats -- there
are still files on the website in Waterloo GML and LaTeX. (Although
to somebody's credit (probably Lou's), plain-text equivalents are
usually provided as well.)

Notes
-----
[1] s{(code
|copyOf
|depPtr
|end
|follow
|from
|grpPtr
|hand
|lang
|location
|mergedin
|new
|next
|old
|origin
|parent
|prev
|render
|resp
|sameAs
|scheme
|script
|since
|start
|target
|to
|value
|who)=(["'])([^'" \t\n\r\f]+['"])}
{\1=\2#\3}xg;
[2] Embarrassingly there were a few *invalid* specifications, which I
should probably go fix shortly. Sigh.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Nov 11 2004 - 18:46:09 EST

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Nov 11 19:24:45 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:24:45 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:24:45 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>
> This seems like it could be quite problematic for anyone trying to
> write software that could do something intelligent with unmodified
> TEI P5 files. With this proposal authors of such software would need
> to be able to process
> * ID/IDREF using id=, and
> * XPointers using xml:id=, and
> * lang= pointing to via ID/IDREF, and
> * xml:lang= being an RFC 3066 (or successor) language tag &
> potentially pointing to via ident=
Taking these in turn:
* ID/IDREF would stay exactly the same
* xml:id doesn't supply an xpointer so why would processors need to
handle one?
* @lang doesn't point to but to and would continue to
do so
* @xml:lang if supplied can only provide an RF6 3066 code, so doesnt
need to point to anything -- my guess is that many people who are fed up
with having to supply a element would regard this as a big
step forward!
>
> I'm not entirely sure why. It's not as if there are dozens of
> processing systems out there that can do the right thing with lang=,
> but won't be able to handle xml:lang=. Same for id=, really, with the
> obvious exception of validators.
depends what you think the right thing is. i think that handling
id/idref is all that's involved, and there are hundreds of processors
that do that
> My first reaction was "no it won't", but that's not true. It could,
> at least for the case of xml:lang=.
Good. Your second reaction is an improvement!
>
> For xml:id=, I can't imagine that there won't be software to perform
> instance conversion.
Data conversion is always possible, of course. The aim here is to reduce
the number of times it is *essential*.

> However, if this "choice of lang= or xml:lang= but not both" proposal
> is not adopted, then those converting legacy data will have to go
> about creating a look-up table that will convert their local lang=
> values (which are by definition arbitrary IDREFs) into xml:lang=
> values (which will be by definition RFC 3066 or its successor
> language tags).
No they won't. My proposal is exactly that they don't have to convert
their instance data at all.

> Of course, many projects actually deliberately choose to use RFC 3066
> language tags as the value of id= of (and thus of lang=)
> already, and thus wouldn't have to do anything special.
Quite.

> The main problem I foresee pertains to people who have stretched the
> meaning of "language" a wee bit, and have things like
>
> and
>
> in their files.
This problem will raise its head in the element indicated (of
which there will, by definition, be only one instance). That has an
ISO639 attribute which should give the intended correspondence, of course.
>>
>>Not least for us!
>
>
> Who's us? While the TEI-C certainly has lots of data lying around in
> P4 format, is there a strong reason to migrate it all to P5? It
> appears we have a history of leaving things in older formats -- there
> are still files on the website in Waterloo GML and LaTeX. (Although
> to somebody's credit (probably Lou's), plain-text equivalents are
> usually provided as well.)
>
I was thinking more of our current tool chain.
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Nov 11 2004 - 19:21:17 EST

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Thu Nov 11 19:44:39 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:44:39 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <97B649F8-341E-11D9-813B-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Message-ID: <16788.1911.109444.651620@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:44:39 -0500

> I'm assuming that I'm still a council member until the end of the
> calendar year...
Yes, your term ends 31 Dec 04.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Nov 11 2004 - 19:45:18 EST

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Nov 11 19:51:16 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 09:51:16 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 09:51:16 +0900

Lou Burnard oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I think)
> accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced by a global
> xml:lang attribute; likewise the Standoff WG has proposed and the
> Council is (I think) still ruminating about the notion that the global
> "id" attribute should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute.
>
> Pondering how to actually implement these proposals in P5 without
> causing too much havoc, I have reached the conclusion that it would be
> both feasible and advisable to make the transition in a rather more
> cautious way. I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to lang
> in the definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a
> replacement for it.
I think we should do what we can to make the transition to P5 easier,
on the other hand, I do not see much to be gained in making a half-way
transition possible, let alone recommending it. The value TEI
requires for lang has to follow ISO 639 and RFC 3066 (might be wrong
with the number..) and xml:lang does so similarily, except that it
point to newer versions that are themselves backward compatible. In
most cases, there will be no change necessary. So I do not really see
what is to be gained by allowing lang. The case is of course
different with xml:id, and the whole ID/IDREF stuff -- as I understand
the current situation, there will be an option to retain ID/IDREF
processing in schemata that have this notion, no?

All the best,
Christian

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Thu Nov 11 20:04:27 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:04:27 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <4193E63A.5090502@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16788.3099.342698.980837@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:04:27 -0500

> ... my suggestion is not that we should try to keep lang to the
> exclusion of xml:lang. Rather it is that we should allow for a
> transitional period in which existing TEI software which does
> understand and use "lang" in exactly the same way that software
> yet to be constructed will presumably use "xml:lang" should
> continue to be usable in the new regime.
OK, I'll bite. What software do you have in mind? Could this
software be used on a P5 file at all?
I'm thinking that if there does exist software that intelligently
makes use of the lang= of TEI P4 files, that software is going to
need to be reworked quite a lot to process a P5 file in the first
place. Is there really an enormous advantage to delaying changing
the part of the code that handles lang= so that at reads "xml:lang"
instead of "lang" and doesn't depend on their being a corresponding
?

> It's more about software than data: as you correctly point out,
> legacy data may need to be changed anyway if it doesn't use the
> right language identifiers.
But legacy software needs to be changed anyway, too.

> ... it surely can't be a bad idea to make transition to P5 less
> of an obstacle if we can do so.
That depends entirely on the cost of the construct (for lack of a
better word) being implemented to make transition less of an
obstacle. If (as in this case) the cost of the construct that would
make transition easier also makes P5 a weaker specification, then
yes, it may be a bad idea.

> So I think we ought to try at least a little to be more
> accomodating, where we can do so without too much effort or
> confusion.
I think presenting users with "you can use either lang= or xml:lang="
and "either id= or xml:id=" is, in fact, adding confusion. The
question is whether or not the extra ease in migration is worth the
added confusion. Personally, I don't think so, but I'm willing to be
convinced.

> My suggestion is that allowing for the old names to subsist, as
> alternates for the new ones, buys us a lot in terms of lowering
> the entry price, at virtually no additional cost in maintaining
> duplicate tool chains. OK, new tools have to allow for either
> lang or xml:lang and have to process them identically. But that's
> it.
While I guess it does lower the entry price, seems like a pretty
significant cost to me.

> The case with id and xml:id seems more or less the same to me.
> The point you make about having to change the values of this
> attribute in legacy data seems mistaken: surely the new version
> of id="foo" is xml:id="foo", not xml:id="#foo"? Where data has to
> change is in the value of the "target" attribute surely?
Absolutely, it's the IDREF and IDREFS attribute values that need to
be changed to have the preceding "#".
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Nov 11 2004 - 20:06:30 EST

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Nov 11 20:06:55 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:06:55 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:06:55 +0900

Lou Burnard oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> Syd Bauman wrote:
>
>
>> However, if this "choice of lang= or xml:lang= but not both" proposal
>> is not adopted, then those converting legacy data will have to go
>> about creating a look-up table that will convert their local lang=
>> values (which are by definition arbitrary IDREFs) into xml:lang=
>> values (which will be by definition RFC 3066 or its successor
>> language tags).
>
> No they won't. My proposal is exactly that they don't have to convert
> their instance data at all.
>
>
>> Of course, many projects actually deliberately choose to use RFC 3066
>> language tags as the value of id= of (and thus of lang=)
>> already, and thus wouldn't have to do anything special.
>
> Quite.

On the element, P4X says the following:

On this element, the global id attribute specifies the identifier for
the writing system declaration for this language (e.g. eng, fra,
deu). Its value will usually be a language identifier from ISO 639,
possibly extended to indicate the writing system in use (e.g. heb-hel
for Hebrew written in Greek.

If people did follow this recommendation, there is no need for them to
convert any instance data.
BTW, do you plan to retain lang as a IDREF?

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Nov 11 20:07:37 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:07:37 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16788.1911.109444.651620@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:07:37 +0900

Syd Bauman edu> writes:
>> I'm assuming that I'm still a council member until the end of the
>> calendar year...
>
> Yes, your term ends 31 Dec 04.
>
But you will continue as the chair of the SO workgroup:-)
All the best,
Christian

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Thu Nov 11 20:08:46 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:08:46 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] to id or not to id In-Reply-To: <419403D0.7020300@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16788.3358.366994.165657@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:08:46 -0500

> One could argue that the core should remain pure, and have only
> xml:id and xml:lang. But that a P4 compatibility module could
> introduce the @id/@xml:id choice. This would have the advantage
> that P5 users who wanted to work in this way would have to be
> more explicit about it, by adding a new module to their
> portfolio.
This is, in fact, what the SO work-group recommended. Council did not
explicitly address the suggestion for the add-on module that swaps
id= for xml:id=, IDREF for tei.pointer, and IDREFS for tei.pointers.
In principle I think such a module is a good idea, whether it's just
an ID/IDREF module or a complete "P4 Compatibility" module. (Or
both. :-)

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Thu Nov 11 21:06:46 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:06:46 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:06:46 -0500

> * ID/IDREF would stay exactly the same
Yes, it would, but that doesn't change my point. Software being
written to process P5 files as they are currently envisioned would
not have to know how to process ID/IDREF. If the "id= or xml:id="
proposal is implemented, such software would have to know how to do
this. Furthermore, software would have to be able to process
XPointers pointing to id=, XPointers pointing to xml:id=, IDREFs
pointing to id=, and IDREFs pointing to xml:id=. (The last of which
may present a bit of a problem when there's no DTD available.)

> * xml:id doesn't supply an xpointer so why would processors need to
> handle one?
Because that's how you point at one. Yes, I know xml:id= merely
supplies an ID and thus can be pointed at by IDREF, but you weren't
suggesting that, were you?

> * @lang doesn't point to but to and would
> continue to do so
Right, sorry for the slip. But I think you may be missing my point,
because you say "would continue to do so" as if that were a good
thing, whereas my point was that it would continue to do so, and
that's a bad thing because software vendors would have to deal with
it.

> * @xml:lang if supplied can only provide an RF6 3066 code, so
> doesnt need to point to anything -- my guess is that many people
> who are fed up with having to supply a element would
> regard this as a big step forward!
Right. But again, my point is that software reading a P5 file would
need to be prepared to handle both lang= and xml:lang=, even in the
same document. The big step forward (not needing a ) is
available to P5 users whether or not we implement the "lang= OR
xml:lang=" proposal.

> depends what you think the right thing is. i think that handling
> id/idref is all that's involved, and there are hundreds of
> processors that do that
I don't understand. First, what software other than validators (which
don't actually *do* anything, really) and XSLT style-sheets (which, if
I understand correctly, will be quite easy to convert) handle
ID/IDREF of lang= and ? In my mind, the right thing is
going to be processing of the content in a manner that's dependent on
its language. E.g.m, speaking German passages in German; or different
coloring in printed output; or looking up a word in a
language-specific dictionary when it's clicked.

> > For xml:id=, I can't imagine that there won't be software to
> > perform instance conversion.
> Data conversion is always possible, of course. The aim here is to
> reduce the number of times it is *essential*.
I suspect you've misspoken here, in that this aim doesn't support
your position -- data conversion is essential in 100% of cases,
whether or not we go with the "id= OR xml:id=" proposal.
Perhaps what you meant was that the aim here is to reduce the number
of things that have to be changed or the number of steps in the
conversion process?

> > However, if this "choice of lang= or xml:lang= but not both"
> > proposal is not adopted, then those converting legacy data will
> > have to go about creating a look-up table that will convert their
> > local lang= values (which are by definition arbitrary IDREFs)
> > into xml:lang= values (which will be by definition RFC 3066 or
> > its successor language tags).
> No they won't. My proposal is exactly that they don't have to
> convert their instance data at all.
Right. The above quoted passage starts with "... is *not* adopted
..." (emphasis added). But that said, 100% of all P4 instances will
have to be converted. None will be valid P5 without some conversion.

> > The main problem I foresee pertains to people who have stretched
> > the meaning of "language" a wee bit, and have things like
> >
> > and
> >
> > in their files.
>
> This problem will raise its head in the element
> indicated (of which there will, by definition, be only one
> instance). That has an ISO639 attribute which should give the
> intended correspondence, of course.
There is no ISO639 code for either XML or TeX. But now that I think
about it, if such people are willing to stretch the meaning of
"language", they probably won't mind (ab)using the private use tags
("x-") of 3066, and won't have much of a problem.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Nov 11 2004 - 21:07:28 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 15:03:14 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:03:14 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:03:14 +0000

We seem to have dropped this thread a bit. I was getting the impression that
the majority of council members do not accept the argument that P5
should have transitional features to aid migration. Is that a fair judgment,
or should we have a show of (electronic) hands?
If we _do_ say that P5 should go straight to xml:, it can be assumed
that it will be possible to write a "teip4compat" module as and when needed;
but that we don't need to decide now either a) how much compatibility,
and b) how to own or maintain the beast. "A job delayed is a job done",
as I always say.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 21 2004 - 15:06:00 EST

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 16:09:52 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:09:52 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:09:52 +0000

Though related, I think these are two different issues.
I am now reasonably persuaded that it is possible to make good arguments
for going to both xml:id and xml:lang without further ado. Drafts need
to be produced for the relevant pieces of P5 as soon as possible, so
that Council may review them. It is one thing to agree in principle to
an idea as sketched out e.g. in David's summary of the issues, but quite
another to agree to its full ramifications when presented in
Guidelines-style prose with examples and justifications.
I am also reasonably well persuaded that there isn't any immediate need
for TEI P4 compatability module, and unless anyone on Council wishes to
argue otherwise, my intention is that we do not do so unless and until
the idea surfaces again in the TEI community. (But mark my words -- it
will).

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> We seem to have dropped this thread a bit. I was getting the impression
> that
> the majority of council members do not accept the argument that P5
> should have transitional features to aid migration. Is that a fair
> judgment,
> or should we have a show of (electronic) hands?
>
> If we _do_ say that P5 should go straight to xml:, it can be
> assumed
> that it will be possible to write a "teip4compat" module as and when
> needed;
> but that we don't need to decide now either a) how much compatibility,
> and b) how to own or maintain the beast. "A job delayed is a job done",
> as I always say.
>
> Sebastian
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 16:27:20 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:27:20 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A10838.9000706@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:27:20 +0000

Lou Burnard wrote:
>
> I am now reasonably persuaded that it is possible to make good
> arguments for going to both xml:id and xml:lang without further ado.
> Drafts need to be produced for the relevant pieces of P5 as soon as
> possible, so that Council may review them. It is one thing to agree in
> principle to an idea as sketched out e.g. in David's summary of the
> issues, but quite another to agree to its full ramifications when
> presented in Guidelines-style prose with examples and justifications.
Do we have the final proposal on what pointers should look like? is
SOW-09 it? as I understand it,
and vanish, and the "target" attribute of and
points to a URL. Correct?
And I assume this is part and parcel of the change to xml:id, or do we
do them separately?
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 21 2004 - 16:28:53 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 16:31:15 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:31:15 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A10923.6090608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:31:15 +0000

By the way, the current SOW=09 says, in aside sort of way:
"In the current draft of P5, all addresses refer by means of XML IDs,
making the processing of a single chapter at a time difficult. To make
chapter-by chapter processing of the Guidelines easy, current IDREFs to
a chapter of the Guidelines like the chapter on linking, referred to as
SA, would be modified if they appeared in another file of the
guidelines, so that:

In section we introduced the simplest
pointer elements, ptr and ref.
would be replaced by a reference such as

In section we introduced the simplest
pointer elements, ptr and ref."

This rather horrifies me, as it implies that the separate chapters are
always
separate documents, which will be presented separately. Either the
Guidelines
are a single document, or they are not. Whether you can process a chapter
by itself for proofing purposes is a matter of internal hackery....
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 21 2004 - 16:32:52 EST

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 21 17:58:58 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 07:58:58 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 07:58:58 +0900

Dear Council members,
the TEI Technical COuncil will hold a telephone conference coming
monday the 29th of November.
I would like to collect agenda items for this meeting. Please send
them either to me or to the list as soon as possible.
As usual, the active WGs are expected to report on their progress. I
would also like to ask the workgroups, especially SO, to point us to
updated documents etc. to allow the council members to prepare for the
discussion.
There is a document from the Sanskrit taskforce (Lou: can you give us
the URL please), which we will discuss; please read and comment on it.
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 21 2004 - 17:59:07 EST

From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 18:12:15 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou-at-home) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:12:15 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou-at-home
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:12:15 +0000

Christian Wittern wrote:
>
> There is a document from the Sanskrit taskforce (Lou: can you give us
> the URL please), which we will discuss; please read and comment on it.
>
http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/CE/cew12.pdf
(sorry for delay in posting this -- it got overlooked till Chris
reminded me)
Lou
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 21 2004 - 18:12:59 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 18:34:26 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:34:26 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:34:26 +0000

Its not clear whether this is to be in an entirely new module, or form
part of an existing
optional module. It looks to be as if the idea is for a module to
replace an open-ended
list of attribute values for /@type with closed lists; I am
wondering how to do this in ODD,
so can others confirm that this _is_ the proposal?
ebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 21 2004 - 18:36:06 EST

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sun Nov 21 18:47:44 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:47:44 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] P4 compatibility mode (was "Re: xml-colon-thing") In-Reply-To: <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16801.10528.584659.551046@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:47:44 -0500

> We seem to have dropped this thread a bit. I was getting the
> impression that the majority of council members do not accept the
> argument that P5 should have transitional features to aid
> migration. Is that a fair judgment, or should we have a show of
> (electronic) hands?
Remember that, for the ID/IDREF issue, SO has already proposed (and I
think Council agreed to in principle in Ghent, but not explicitly as
there were still questions on the IDREFS issue back then) that we
provide a module that would allow use of ID/IDREF instead of
XPointers.
I could probably be persuaded that the "wait and see if anyone wants
it" approach is the way to go, even on this issue. But I do think we
want to keep it (an ID/IDREF module) in the backs of our minds, even
if we don't create it right up front, and even if we don't create an
entire "P4 compatibility mode" module.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 21 2004 - 18:48:23 EST

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sun Nov 21 19:06:18 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:06:18 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:06:18 -0500

> I am now reasonably persuaded that it is possible to make good
> arguments for going to both xml:id and xml:lang without further
> ado.
Does that mean you believe that all the arguments CE and SO have put
forth up to this point have not been good? I'm not sure I would
consider the mere possibility of good arguments is sufficient, at
least in the face of any good arguments against.

> Drafts need to be produced for the relevant pieces of P5 as soon as
> possible, so that Council may review them. It is one thing to agree
> in principle to an idea as sketched out e.g. in David's summary of
> the issues, but quite another to agree to its full ramifications
> when presented in Guidelines-style prose with examples and
> justifications.
While your logic (that it's worth reading full idea fleshed out with
examples etc) is sound, the conclusion (that P5 should be altered
now) does not follow.
* Changing P5 so that it refers to xml:id= is a bit of a deal, as all
Sebastian's style-sheets need to be changed to match.
* Changing P5 so that it uses XPointers to point to xml:id= instead
of IDREFs is a really big deal, as all Sebastian's style-sheets
need to be changed to match.
* I don't see that there would be justifications in the Guidelines,
anyway, so if we want more of that we need to ask for more working
papers sort of things.
* Changing P5 to do these things is itself a very significant change
(e.g., dozens to hundreds of examples need to be changed; at least
10 chapters discuss pointing), so IMHO Council should be pretty
sure of it first, before we devote serious time and effort to it.
That said, until Baltimore, I thought we *were* pretty sure of
this.
I find this whole discussion a little dusty (as in "the dust never
settles" :-). A few weeks before Baltimore the discussion (among you,
me, & Sebastian) was not *should* we make this change, but *how*
we should do it.
Sebastian said he would not be ready to perform the needed changes to
the style-sheets until at least December, at which time we either have
to halt other production on P5 while these changes are made (my idea)
or use Perforce to create a separate branch of P5 source and make the
changes there, re-merging them when complete (Sebastian's idea).
I realize this is a weird role-reversal (months ago I was the one
chomping at the bit to change P5 to use XPointers, and first Lou,
then Sebastian, were saying "whoa" :-), but I really have concerns
about putting serious resources into this change unless we are quite
convinced we want it in the end product.

> I am also reasonably well persuaded that there isn't any
> immediate need for TEI P4 compatability module, and unless anyone
> on Council wishes to argue otherwise, my intention is that we do
> not do so unless and until the idea surfaces again in the TEI
> community. (But mark my words -- it will).
Good. But if you really think it will surface (I'm not 100% sure I
understand why it would -- perhaps you could recreate your chart of
data vs tools you presented in Baltimore), we should keep it in the
backs of our minds as we move forward, so as to not do anything that
would arbitrarily make it difficult to do so.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 21 2004 - 19:06:56 EST

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sun Nov 21 20:47:25 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:47:25 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A10838.9000706@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16801.17709.629944.963222@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:47:25 -0500

> as I understand it, and vanish, and the "target"
> attribute of and points to a URL. Correct?
Well, sorta. The value of target= of and (as well as all
the other IDREF attributes) will be a URI Reference, the fragment
identifier of which (i.e., the part after the "#") uses the XPointer
Framework[1].

> And I assume this is part and parcel of the change to xml:id, or
> do we do them separately?
I have always spoken of them and represented them as one and the
same, but in truth they are entirely separable. If I understand
correctly, neither one has any thwarting impact on the other.

Notes
-----
[1] With additional XPointer schemes available, the details of which
Council *really* needs to read up on and either object to or approve
ASAP.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 21 2004 - 20:48:04 EST

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 21 21:15:18 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:15:18 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:15:18 +0900

Sebastian Rahtz oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> Its not clear whether this is to be in an entirely new module, or form
> part of an existing
> optional module. It looks to be as if the idea is for a module to
> replace an open-ended
> list of attribute values for /@type with closed lists; I am
> wondering how to do this in ODD,
> so can others confirm that this _is_ the proposal?
Yes, the proposal is just to provide a list of suggested values for
attributes, they do not want new tags anymore for themselves, but they
do rely on .
Which brings me to the question: What is the status of ?
All the best,
Christian

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Nov 22 00:40:09 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:40:09 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A10923.6090608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16801.31673.617225.721577@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:40:09 -0500

> By the way, the current SOW=09 says, in aside sort of way: ...
I do not at the moment have an opinion on this one at all, let alone
a strong one. So I'd like to understand the pros and cons on both
sides.
I am sure I understand the current problem: editing a single file of
a multi-file document (like the Guidelines) is a big pain with XML
IDs that point to another file.
I agree with SOW09's point (David Durand's idea, I think, but might
have been someone else's) that if one used a relative URI reference
this would not be a problem.
But I'm a bit confused ... since XML editing software doesn't
typically validate bare name references, wouldn't using just a bare
name avoid most the problems as well as using a relative URI
reference would? E.g.

> This rather horrifies me, as it implies that the separate
> chapters are always separate documents, which will be presented
> separately.
I don't think it implies separate documents at all, let alone
always.

> Either the Guidelines are a single document, or they are not.
Seems a little counter-intuitive to me -- why wouldn't the wave /
particle dilemma apply? I think of the Guidelines as a single
document, as I think most people do, but chapter 2 is even produced
as a separate document.

> Whether you can process a chapter by itself for proofing purposes
> is a matter of internal hackery...
I'm not sure what you mean by "internal hackery", but if it isn't
tricks like using a relative URI reference ("./name#here") instead of
a bare name ("#here"), what is it?
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 00:40:50 EST

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Nov 22 01:18:18 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:18:18 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:18:18 -0500

> As usual, the active WGs are expected to report on their
> progress. I would also like to ask the workgroups, especially SO,
> to point us to updated documents etc. to allow the council
> members to prepare for the discussion.
Personally, I would really prefer we didn't bother with WG reports
for WGs that haven't anything to report. (PB, SO, CE, MI jump to mind
as likely candidates; of course the WG chairs would know better than
I.) That will leave more time for other agenda items, about which
I'll try to say more tomorrow. But if nothing else, I think
Councilors should really read SO W 09
(http://www.tei-c.org[.uk]/Activities/SO/sow09.html) and ask enough
questions on the list (and presumably get answers) before the call so
that they can actually express a definitive opinion on this.
It would also be really helpful (IMHO) if someone (perhaps David,
David, or Sebastian?) were to post an example snippet of XSLT that
would follow a bare name pointer. (I was shocked to find XSLT won't
just do this on its own -- after all, XHTML uses href= with bare
names all the time, doesn't it? There must be cook book examples of
this, no?)
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 01:18:56 EST

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Nov 22 02:07:06 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:07:06 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16801.36890.687232.101801@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:07:06 -0500

> It looks to be as if the idea is for a module to replace an
> open-ended list of attribute values for /@type with closed
> lists; I am wondering how to do this in ODD,
Would it not be something like the following (doing this off top of
head, so may not be well-formed, let alone valid)?

a bird

a bird's sound

a bird's walk

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 02:07:52 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 04:39:33 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:39:33 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1B3D5.6070309@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:39:33 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>It would also be really helpful (IMHO) if someone (perhaps David,
>David, or Sebastian?) were to post an example snippet of XSLT that
>would follow a bare name pointer.
>
>
what is a "bare name pointer", I wonder? you provide the
example document, I'll show you the XSLT.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 04:41:44 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 06:22:22 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:22:22 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:22:22 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>
>* Changing P5 so that it refers to xml:id= is a bit of a deal, as all
> Sebastian's style-sheets need to be changed to match.
>
>
this has to be done regardless. I am now happy to bite the
bullet
>* Changing P5 so that it uses XPointers to point to xml:id= instead
> of IDREFs is a really big deal, as all Sebastian's style-sheets
> need to be changed to match.
>
>
I suspect there are so few uses of IDREFS that it won't be that
hard.
>* Changing P5 to do these things is itself a very significant change
> (e.g., dozens to hundreds of examples need to be changed;
>
thats automated, if the examples are done right
> at least
> 10 chapters discuss pointing), so IMHO Council should be pretty
> sure of it first, before we devote serious time and effort to it.
>
>
indeed. but the Council accepted the principle in Ghent,
and asked for clarification in some areas, which has now been
given. so I don't see any reason to delay a decision
>Sebastian said he would not be ready to perform the needed changes to
>the style-sheets until at least December, at which time we either have
>to halt other production on P5 while these changes are made (my idea)
>or use Perforce to create a separate branch of P5 source and make the
>changes there, re-merging them when complete (Sebastian's idea).
>
>
I'm ready to bring this forward a bit; I am also rather inclining
to your view now, that we should close P5 for a week and do
it in one big go.
>we should keep it in the
>backs of our minds as we move forward, so as to not do anything that
>would arbitrarily make it difficult to do so.
>
>
agreed. I do have a P4 compat module as one of the ODD test files,
so I'd expect to roughly keep it in sync
ebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 06:24:30 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 06:25:19 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:25:19 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16801.17709.629944.963222@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1CC9F.7000705@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:25:19 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>[1] With additional XPointer schemes available, the details of which
> Council *really* needs to read up on and either object to or approve
> ASAP.
>
>
I wonder. Since there are no uses of extended pointer
in the Guidelines per se, we can switch the Guidelines document
and its processing stylesheets now, and leave the additional schemes
more fluid. They'll only affect the examples, for which we don't
have any processing software.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 06:27:24 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 06:31:19 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:31:19 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16801.31673.617225.721577@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1CE07.3070505@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:31:19 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>I am sure I understand the current problem: editing a single file of
>a multi-file document (like the Guidelines) is a big pain with XML
>IDs that point to another file.
>
>
>
they point to other places within the same document; that
document _happens_ to be instantiated as several files on disk
at present, but that is by no means set in stone. We could switch to
a single XML file tomorrow if we felt like it.
>I agree with SOW09's point (David Durand's idea, I think, but might
>have been someone else's) that if one used a relative URI reference
>this would not be a problem.
>
>
but you can't use a relative URI. a URI points to another document. the
other chapters are not other documents.
>But I'm a bit confused ... since XML editing software doesn't
>typically validate bare name references, wouldn't using just a bare
>name avoid most the problems as well as using a relative URI
>reference would? E.g.
>
>
yes, thats what I assumed we would do
>
>Seems a little counter-intuitive to me -- why wouldn't the wave /
>particle dilemma apply?
>
'taint a dilemma for me :-}
> I think of the Guidelines as a single
>document, as I think most people do, but chapter 2 is even produced
>as a separate document.
>
>
no. a separate document can be produced which uses
the same content as chapter 2. not the same thing....
>I'm not sure what you mean by "internal hackery", but if it isn't
>tricks like using a relative URI reference ("./name#here") instead of
>a bare name ("#here"), what is it?
>
>
when you process chapter X which references #foo in chapter Y,
you consult the eXist database to see which chapter #foo is in,
and say "somewhere in chapter Y".
ebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 06:33:15 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 06:40:41 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:40:41 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16801.36890.687232.101801@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1D039.2080909@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:40:41 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>
>
>
>
> a bird
>
>
> a bird's sound
>
>
> a bird's walk
>
>
>
>
>
>
as it stands, I don't think this works, because the change mode only works
when you write a schema which loads the TEI and changes it. A module
does not function like that. surely the intention is to limit the fixed
list to s which
occur inside , not all s? and there are two fixed lists, one
for the first set and one for the second set of s?
ebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 06:42:45 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 07:07:48 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:07:48 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41A1D694.7080708@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:07:48 +0000

Christian Wittern wrote:
>Yes, the proposal is just to provide a list of suggested values for
>attributes, they do not want new tags anymore for themselves, but they
>do rely on .
>
>Which brings me to the question: What is the status of ?
>
>
>
we could try to "pass" that next week, but I guess its waiting
on a final writeup from (probably) Lou and James
ebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 07:09:50 EST

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Nov 22 08:04:29 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:04:29 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:04:29 +0900

Syd Bauman edu> writes:
>> As usual, the active WGs are expected to report on their
>> progress. I would also like to ask the workgroups, especially SO,
>> to point us to updated documents etc. to allow the council
>> members to prepare for the discussion.
>
> Personally, I would really prefer we didn't bother with WG reports
> for WGs that haven't anything to report. (PB, SO, CE, MI jump to mind
> as likely candidates; of course the WG chairs would know better than
> I.)
I see your point. On the other hand, one of the purpose of these calls
is to provide the WG's with deadlines that spur them into activity.
No reports = no deadlines = no activity. But I agree that to have
this play out better, an earlier reminder for the call would be
necessary.
CE is not active any more, BTW.
> That will leave more time for other agenda items, about which
> I'll try to say more tomorrow. But if nothing else, I think
> Councilors should really read SO W 09
> (http://www.tei-c.org[.uk]/Activities/SO/sow09.html) and ask enough
> questions on the list (and presumably get answers) before the call so
> that they can actually express a definitive opinion on this.
Please do so!
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 08:04:40 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 08:05:00 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:05:00 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41A1E3FC.8070005@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:05:00 +0000

Christian Wittern wrote:
>CE is not active any more, BTW.
>
>
unfortunately, not all of its recommendations have been implemented :-}
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 08:07:06 EST

From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Nov 22 08:13:51 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:13:51 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:13:51 +0900

Sebastian Rahtz oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> Syd Bauman wrote:
>
>>
>>* Changing P5 so that it refers to xml:id= is a bit of a deal, as all
>> Sebastian's style-sheets need to be changed to match.
>>
>>
> this has to be done regardless. I am now happy to bite the
> bullet
>
>>* Changing P5 so that it uses XPointers to point to xml:id= instead
>> of IDREFs is a really big deal, as all Sebastian's style-sheets
>> need to be changed to match.
>>
>>
> I suspect there are so few uses of IDREFS that it won't be that
> hard.
>
>>* Changing P5 to do these things is itself a very significant change
>> (e.g., dozens to hundreds of examples need to be changed;
>>
> thats automated, if the examples are done right
>
>> at least
>> 10 chapters discuss pointing), so IMHO Council should be pretty
>> sure of it first, before we devote serious time and effort to it.
>>
>>
> indeed. but the Council accepted the principle in Ghent,
> and asked for clarification in some areas, which has now been
> given. so I don't see any reason to delay a decision
I hope we can come to a decision at the next call. This requires that
everybody is up to date on the problem. To ensure this is the case,
the best would be to point us to a clear document (SOW09?) where we
can find it all lined out.

>>Sebastian said he would not be ready to perform the needed changes to
>>the style-sheets until at least December, at which time we either have
>>to halt other production on P5 while these changes are made (my idea)
>>or use Perforce to create a separate branch of P5 source and make the
>>changes there, re-merging them when complete (Sebastian's idea).
We have been discussing these style-sheets on-and-off as if they were
part of P5, which they are not. At the moment they are not even
officially "TEI-branded", they are just hacked together by Sebastian,
who happens to do a lot of other work for the TEI. We definetely
should give some thought to the status of these style-sheets and the
way how they work now. In that context, we should consider whether we
want to devote some effort to a considerable overhaul of the design,
document for example how they pick up certain @rend values (and work
magically with lots of attributes the Guidelines do not even now off),
through in different (dare I say, foreing) namespaces. If we do deem
they important for the TEI project, we need to do something about
that.
I'd like to put this on the agenda if nobody convinces me otherwise.

All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 08:14:00 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 08:20:22 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:20:22 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41A1E796.20208@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:20:22 +0000

Christian Wittern wrote:
>We have been discussing these style-sheets on-and-off as if they were
>part of P5, which they are not. At the moment they are not even
>officially "TEI-branded", they are just hacked together by Sebastian,
>
>
This is not entirely true. "The stylesheets" refers to both
the general set I maintain, and also the ones which are needed
to make P5 work (which were paid for by the NEH). Syd
refers to the latter - we need to fix "the stylesheets" now
because they turn P5 ODDs into HTML and PDF, as well
as any future job on general P5 documents.
the changes are not a big deal, just fiddly, needing
concentration over a couple of days.
>I'd like to put this on the agenda if nobody convinces me otherwise.
>
>
>
If you can make it more specific than "what we shall we do about it",
it would help. A specific proposal would be useful.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 08:22:20 EST

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Nov 22 14:17:43 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:17:43 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A1B3D5.6070309@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16802.15191.479589.181646@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:17:43 -0500

> what is a "bare name pointer", I wonder? you provide the
> example document, I'll show you the XSLT.
is a bare name pointer that points over xml:id="that"/>. target="http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html#id67420."/>

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Nov 22 14:31:07 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:31:07 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16802.15995.327189.209887@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:31:07 -0500

> >* Changing P5 so that it refers to xml:id= is a bit of a deal, as
> > all Sebastian's style-sheets need to be changed to match.
> this has to be done regardless. I am now happy to bite the
> bullet
Excellent. We'll talk off-list about when.

> I suspect there are so few uses of IDREFS that it won't be that
> hard.
(That was "IDREFs", not "IDREFS" ... I hope we're not talking
cross-purposes.) I'll bet you're right, there are probably very few
uses of IDREF in the Guidelines except for and , and
perhaps an occasional . I don't even think we use target= of
. But I could swear you had said it was important (for a
variety of reasons, not the least of which would be your sanity) to
alter the stylesheets all at once, not just the needed-for-Guidelines
set. In which case you need to change the processing of every single
IDREF or IDREFS attribute.

> thats automated, if the examples are done right
May be true, but it doesn't change the fact that it's still quite a
lot of work. Besides, our experience with P4 demonstrates that
examples need to be eyed by a human even if auto-validated.

> I'm ready to bring this forward a bit; I am also rather inclining
> to your view now, that we should close P5 for a week and do it in
> one big go.
Either way. But if we do the "close for a week" method, we need to
take a "snapshot" before we start messing around, to make backing out
easy if something goes wrong.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 14:33:41 EST

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Nov 22 14:48:14 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:48:14 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A1CC9F.7000705@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16802.17022.211577.126327@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:48:14 -0500

> I wonder. Since there are no uses of extended pointer in the
> Guidelines per se, we can switch the Guidelines document and its
> processing stylesheets now, and leave the additional schemes more
> fluid. They'll only affect the examples, for which we don't have
> any processing software.
Errr... ahhh... yes. (I'm hemming and hawing because I think we've
already had this conversation.) Your position, I think, ... well, now
that I think about it, I'm not sure what your position was. I had
initially proposed that the style-sheets need only be able to do what
P4 does, i.e., handle bare names, and only for those elements and
attributes the Guidelines actually use. You pointed out the need to
do all elements & attributes at the same time. I quickly realized
that the consequence of this is that my "bare name only" idea was
stupid, because the new style-sheets also need to handle what P4
does.
Never mind. The point is you're correct, there's no need for you to
feel compelled to process any of the TEI additional XPointer schemes.
At the moment I don't see a need for you to even think about anything
other than a URI Reference with a bare name as the fragment
identifier (e.g., "http://standard/kinda/url#name"), and we might
even be able to get away without the URI part of that (e.g. just
"#name").
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 14:48:52 EST

From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Nov 22 15:00:44 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:00:44 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A1CE07.3070505@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16802.17772.942439.650789@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:00:44 -0500

I see both sides of this coin.
* Why would one want to need an eXist database to do something so
simple? Seems almost ridiculous.
* On the other hand, pointers like "#duck" say exactly what they
mean, whereas pointers like "../pond.xml#duck" references the file
structure, which is an artificial hierarchy and naming system
imposed upon the document, and could change willy-nilly.
So personally, I'm undecided but leaning towards "#duck".
That said ...

> but you can't use a relative URI. a URI points to another
> document. the other chapters are not other documents.
This doesn't make sense to me (prima facie becuas "#duck" *is* a
relative URI, but I think we both mean a spelled-out relative URI).
If I am editing the file
/home/syd/music_discussion.xml
why can't I specify

Like everyone, I have too many Beatles
albums.

When I finally cleaned
house, I found 3 copies of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.
??
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 15:02:05 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 15:52:19 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:52:19 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16802.15191.479589.181646@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A25183.4030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:52:19 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>>what is a "bare name pointer", I wonder? you provide the
>>example document, I'll show you the XSLT.
>>
>>
>
> is a bare name pointer that points over
>xml:id="that"/>.
>target="http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html#id67420."/>
>
>
>
so what's the issue with a stylesheet to process this?
...

select="key('IDS',substring-after(@target,'#'))" mode="xref"/>

....
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 15:58:23 EST

From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 15:56:37 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:56:37 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16802.15995.327189.209887@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A25285.7040101@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:56:37 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>
>(That was "IDREFs", not "IDREFS" ... I hope we're not talking
>cross-purposes.)
>
oh, OK. either way, vanishingly few
>. But I could swear you had said it was important (for a
>variety of reasons, not the least of which would be your sanity) to
>alter the stylesheets all at once, not just the needed-for-Guidelines
>set. In which case you need to change the processing of every single
>IDREF or IDREFS attribute.
>
>
>
i wonder if I currently allow for IDREFs :-}
>May be true, but it doesn't change the fact that it's still quite a
>lot of work. Besides, our experience with P4 demonstrates that
>examples need to be eyed by a human even if auto-validated.
>
>
>
but we never formally validated the examples in P4 in situ, did we
>Either way. But if we do the "close for a week" method, we need to
>take a "snapshot" before we start messing around, to make backing out
>easy if something goes wrong.
>
>
I'l think you find we use a version control system which looks after
this for us :-}
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 16:02:28 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 16:02:21 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:02:21 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16802.17772.942439.650789@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A253DD.6030401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:02:21 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>* Why would one want to need an eXist database to do something so
> simple? Seems almost ridiculous.
>
>
>
because its being used already so extensively in the ODD processing,
its free
>* On the other hand, pointers like "#duck" say exactly what they
> mean, whereas pointers like "../pond.xml#duck" references the file
> structure, which is an artificial hierarchy and naming system
> imposed upon the document, and could change willy-nilly.
>
>
absolutely right. this would be untenable. over dead bodies, etc
>why can't I specify
>
>
Like everyone, I have too many Beatles
> albums.

>
> When I finally cleaned
> house, I found 3 copies of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts > Club Band.
>
>??
>
>
you can, if you want. I dont recommend it tho....:-}
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 16:08:20 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 16:02:48 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:02:48 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16802.17772.942439.650789@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A253F8.50302@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:02:48 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>* Why would one want to need an eXist database to do something so
> simple? Seems almost ridiculous.
>
>
>
because its being used already so extensively in the ODD processing,
its free
>* On the other hand, pointers like "#duck" say exactly what they
> mean, whereas pointers like "../pond.xml#duck" references the file
> structure, which is an artificial hierarchy and naming system
> imposed upon the document, and could change willy-nilly.
>
>
absolutely right. this would be untenable. over dead bodies, etc
>why can't I specify
>
>
Like everyone, I have too many Beatles
> albums.

>
>
I dont, actually!
>
> When I finally cleaned
> house, I found 3 copies of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts > Club Band.
>
>??
>
>
you can, if you want. I dont recommend it tho....:-}
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 16:08:43 EST
From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 17:56:28 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:56:28 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Re: choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41A26E9C.601@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:56:28 +0000

Christian Wittern wrote:

> Which brings me to the question: What is the status of ?
>
A good question! Here's my attempt at an answer. Anyone interested in
the history of the discussion can of course read it by going to the
tei-choice list archive, readily accessible from the tei sourceforge
site (go to http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=41178)
The most recent posting was a useful summary of various possible
approaches to an implementation which Syd produced in September. For
those who don't want to wade through the sourceforge archive, I've also
placed this on the TEI website at
http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/Choice/summary.txt
Since that discussion, I've started (but not finished) some tidying up
of the text of the part of P5 where is first introduced: there
is an XML version of this at
http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/Choice/choice.xml, but it has not yet been
integrated into the main P5 source tree. The tidying up led me to some
further rethinking of what we should be recommending for this element,
on which I would appreciate comments from the Council.
The main issue remains: what should the content model of be.
We started with a fairly complex structure designed to mimic only the
functionality of the janus-tags , etc. I then suggested it
might be good to generalize this to support other, more possible kinds
of parallel readings, e.g. a passage might be marked as unclear, with
both a regularized form, and a corrected form, and that we could do this
with a content model using two classes, rather than two explicit
elements. I proposed originally a class "tei.sic" for readings that
seemed to be based on what the text "says", and another class "tei.corr"
for what the text "ought to say", with the suggestion that the model
might be (tei.sic, tei.corr+)
Thinking about this again I would like to propose that the model should
be loosened still further, to something like (tei.choosable,
tei.choosable+). There are definitely some elements ( as John
Smith's group have proposed) which would need to be members of both
tei.sic and tei.corr, which would lead to a non-deterministic content
model if we adopted my earlier suggestion. More to the point, I am
increasingly uncomfortable with the distinction between what the text
"says" what it "ought to say".
So, my view now (which I will also post to the TEI-choice list for
comment) is that we ought to allow for 2 or more elements from the
"tei.choosable" class inside and leave it at that. The members
of that class are up for grabs, but my current preferred list would be
, , , , and only. Oh, and , of
course.
Syd made the interesting comment that it was hard to distinguish (in a
non-janus world) between and , which the more I think about
it, the more I agree with, which is why is not on the list above.
I see less and less use for this element.
I haven't included and in the list, because I cannot think
of any real situation in which they would be "choosable" -- either there
is an addition/deletion in the text or there isn't. If you wanted to
indicate that one way of interpreting e.g. an addition was by some
regularization or other, then I think you should wrap the addition
within a sic, like this

1st
first

For a given application, of course, people may well want to constrain
the choosable elements, or add others to them. But the basic
out-of-the-box element, I suggest, need not be any more complex than this.

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 17:51:43 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Nov 22 18:40:35 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 08:40:35 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A1E796.20208@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 08:40:35 +0900

Sebastian Rahtz oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> Christian Wittern wrote:
>
>>We have been discussing these style-sheets on-and-off as if they were
>>part of P5, which they are not. At the moment they are not even
>>officially "TEI-branded", they are just hacked together by Sebastian,
>>
>>
> This is not entirely true. "The stylesheets" refers to both
> the general set I maintain, and also the ones which are needed
> to make P5 work (which were paid for by the NEH). Syd
> refers to the latter - we need to fix "the stylesheets" now
> because they turn P5 ODDs into HTML and PDF, as well
> as any future job on general P5 documents.
>
> the changes are not a big deal, just fiddly, needing
> concentration over a couple of days.
Ah sorry, my fault. I was talking, as you know, about those publicly
visible on the tei-c website.
>
>>I'd like to put this on the agenda if nobody convinces me otherwise.
>>
>>
>>
> If you can make it more specific than "what we shall we do about it",
> it would help. A specific proposal would be useful.
The first point to discuss would be if the Council thinks work in this
area needs to be done and should be charged by the Council. If yes,
we need to think about a timeline, details of work to be done, find
people to do the work etc. This is no small job, so we need to think
carefully about it.

At the moment, I think the first part is what we need to decide soon,
the other follows then.
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 18:42:27 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Nov 22 18:51:59 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 08:51:59 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Re: choice In-Reply-To: <41A26E9C.601@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 08:51:59 +0900

Lou Burnard oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> Christian Wittern wrote:
>
>
>> Which brings me to the question: What is the status of ?
>>
>
> A good question! Here's my attempt at an answer. Anyone interested in
> the history of the discussion can of course read it by going to the
> tei-choice list archive, readily accessible from the tei sourceforge
> site (go to http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=41178)
> The most recent posting was a useful summary of various possible
> approaches to an implementation which Syd produced in September. For
> those who don't want to wade through the sourceforge archive, I've also
> placed this on the TEI website at
> http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/Choice/summary.txt
Thank you. I spend a few hours on that sf archive in early September
and did not want to repeat that experience...

>
> So, my view now (which I will also post to the TEI-choice list for
> comment) is that we ought to allow for 2 or more elements from the
> "tei.choosable" class inside and leave it at that. The members
> of that class are up for grabs, but my current preferred list would be
> , , , , and only. Oh, and , of
> course.
>
...
>
> 1st
> first
>
>
> For a given application, of course, people may well want to constrain
> the choosable elements, or add others to them. But the basic
> out-of-the-box element, I suggest, need not be any more complex than this.
Looks good to me. I assume that choice can have more than 2 direct
children. I wonder however, how would an encoder specify paths
through these choices -- this seems to be especially a problem for
children that do not carry semantic bagagge, like . Can we say
something about how we use them in the header?

All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 22 2004 - 18:52:08 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Tue Nov 23 04:02:33 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 09:02:33 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41A2FCA9.1040901@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 09:02:33 +0000

Christian Wittern wrote:
>Ah sorry, my fault. I was talking, as you know, about those publicly
>visible on the tei-c website.
>
>
>
those are due to be phased out in favour of Sourceforge soon, I hope.
>The first point to discuss would be if the Council thinks work in this
>area needs to be done and should be charged by the Council.
>
definitely worth discussion
> If yes,
>we need to think about a timeline, details of work to be done, find
>people to do the work etc. This is no small job, so we need to think
>carefully about it.
>
>
indeed. if we decide to charter a work group in some way,
it would be a new direction to take.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Nov 23 2004 - 04:04:43 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Tue Nov 23 14:40:18 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:40:18 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A1D039.2080909@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16803.37410.132780.340854@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:40:18 -0500

> as it stands, I don't think this works, because the change mode
> only works when you write a schema which loads the TEI and
> changes it. A module does not function like that.
Oh.

> surely the intention is to limit the fixed list to s which
> occur inside , not all s? and there are two fixed
> lists, one for the first set and one for the second set of
> s?
Indeed, this screams for at least co-occurrence constraints, if not
Schematron constraints, doesn't it?
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Nov 23 2004 - 14:40:56 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Tue Nov 23 23:22:16 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:22:16 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16804.3192.611604.972846@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:22:16 -0500

> I hope we can come to a decision at the next call. This requires
> that everybody is up to date on the problem. To ensure this is
> the case, the best would be to point us to a clear document
> (SOW09?) where we can find it all lined out.
Yes, this is pretty much laid out completely in SO W 09
(http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html). While I don't think
the document is perfect, it is the starting point. I think Councilors
should be reading it carefully *now*, not Sun night, so that
questions can be raised before the call.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Nov 23 2004 - 23:22:56 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Wed Nov 24 07:20:20 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:20:20 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] new members participation Message-ID: <16804.31876.444081.928188@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:20:20 -0500

BTW, the new members (James and John, I think) are welcome to
participate in the upcoming conference call. The Board is still
reviewing the operating procedures document, so it has not been
published publiclly yet. It says, at the end of section 1.6:

Newly elected Board and Council members take office on
January 1 following the election. They are added to e-mail
lists immediately following the election, and are
permitted to participate in conference calls at TEI
expense between their election and January 1. They are
also permitted to attend face-to-face meetings during that
time but will not be reimbursed for expenses.

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Wed Nov 24 2004 - 07:21:01 EST
From nsmith at email.unc.edu Wed Nov 24 09:43:15 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:43:15 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16804.3192.611604.972846@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID:

From: Natasha Smith
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:43:15 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)

> I think Councilors
> should be reading it carefully *now*, not Sun night, so that
> questions can be raised before the call.
yes, you are right, it would be physically impossible to catch up at once
with all the threads bursting on the list recently. i was following them
diligently, but missed a few "turns". could anybody let me know how to get
to the list archive?
best, ns

> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Wed Nov 24 2004 - 09:44:17 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Wed Nov 24 10:26:49 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:26:49 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16804.43065.54911.386349@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:26:49 -0500

> could anybody let me know how to get to the list archive?
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Wed Nov 24 2004 - 10:27:27 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Nov 24 17:50:33 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:50:33 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16804.43065.54911.386349@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:50:33 +0900

Syd Bauman edu> writes:
>> could anybody let me know how to get to the list archive?
>
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
It appears that the list archvie changed the access procedures. I for
one could not get in, there is now a password required. Could we
please be informed about the required procedure?
All the best,
Christian

-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Wed Nov 24 2004 - 17:50:54 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Wed Nov 24 22:56:01 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:56:01 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16805.22481.474202.503538@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:56:01 -0500

Disclaimer: I don't run this list, have no true knowledge of how it
works, and don't recall ever having looked at the
archives before.

> Could we please be informed about the required procedure?
I did the following.
* Went to
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council,
scrolled to the bottom, entered my e-mail address into the bottom
text entry field and clicked the "Unsubscribe or edit options"
button next to it.
* Scrolled to bottom of page, clicked on "Remind".
* Waited a while -- took > 30s for e-mail with password to
arrive.
* Entered my password and changed some of my settings.
* Went back to
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council,
clicked on first link "tei-council archives".
* Yay!
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Wed Nov 24 2004 - 22:56:40 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Nov 24 23:21:53 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:21:53 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:21:53 +0900

Syd Bauman edu> writes:
>> As usual, the active WGs are expected to report on their
>> progress. I would also like to ask the workgroups, especially SO,
>> to point us to updated documents etc. to allow the council
>> members to prepare for the discussion.
>
> Personally, I would really prefer we didn't bother with WG reports
> for WGs that haven't anything to report. (PB, SO, CE, MI jump to mind
> as likely candidates; of course the WG chairs would know better than
> I.)
having thought about that a little more, I would like to ask the
chairs of active workgroups to send us a short (1,2 paragraph) report
on recent developments/activities here to this lists prior to the
meeting (preferably until Friday). We can than discuss this where
necessary on Monday and can use the time on the call more efficiently
All the best,
Christian

-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Wed Nov 24 2004 - 23:22:05 EST
From nsmith at email.unc.edu Wed Nov 24 23:27:17 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:27:17 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16805.22481.474202.503538@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <002b01c4d2a7$0ca5f270$6501a8c0@lib.unc.edu>

From: Natasha Smith
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:27:17 -0500

thank you! I wanted first apologize for all the trouble, but then changed my
mind - i think it's quite useful, plus... i like archives.
best, ns
P.S. more seriously - Syd, your help much appreciated.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Syd Bauman" edu>
To: village.Virginia.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 10:56 PM
Subject: Re: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing

> Disclaimer: I don't run this list, have no true knowledge of how it
> works, and don't recall ever having looked at the
> archives before.
>
>
> > Could we please be informed about the required procedure?
>
> I did the following.
>
> * Went to
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council,
> scrolled to the bottom, entered my e-mail address into the bottom
> text entry field and clicked the "Unsubscribe or edit options"
> button next to it.
>
> * Scrolled to bottom of page, clicked on "Remind".
>
> * Waited a while -- took > 30s for e-mail with password to
> arrive.
>
> * Entered my password and changed some of my settings.
>
> * Went back to
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council,
> clicked on first link "tei-council archives".
>
> * Yay!
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Wed Nov 24 2004 - 23:27:28 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Nov 24 23:49:12 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:49:12 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] TEI Council telephone conference on Monday, Nov 29th, 2004 at 1300 UTC Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:49:12 +0900

TEI Council Members and Editors:
This is the agenda for the conference call the TEI Council will
hold later this coming Monday, Nov 29th, 2004 at 1300 UTC.
Please read through the following, in advance of the call.

INSTRUCTIONS for conference call:
US participants can dial a toll-free number:
1-800-565-9881
Once you're connected, dial 239046# and you should be connected shortly.
Participants from outside the US will have to make a long-distance call to the US:
+1 416 695 7870
and then follow the same instructions.
Expected members to participate:
Syd Bauman, Alejandro Bia, David Birnbaum, Lou Burnard, Matthew
Driscoll, David Durand, Julia Flanders, Sebastian Rahtz, Laurent
Romary, Natasha Smith, Susan Schreibman, Edward Vanhoutte, Perry
Willett, Christian Wittern.
Welcome to participate are also
James Cummings and John Walsh

Agenda:
8 items, not more than 15 minutes apiece.
-----------------------------------------------------

1) Review of the minutes from the call of Sep. 20th (10 min)
Minutes of the meeting are at
http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html. Review of action items,
progress.

2) Short report from the MM2004 (5 min, Lou Burnard)
-----------------------------------------------------
3) Sanskrit taskforce report (10 min):
Please read
http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/CE/cew12.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------

4) Rollcall on the active WGs (15 min) :
Standoff (SOW09), Manuscripts, Feature Structures, Physical Bibliography,
Meta Language
-----------------------------------------------------
5) xml-colon-thing (15 min)

How should xml:id, xml:lang be handled? See the discussion on
tei-council in the last weeks.
-----------------------------------------------------
6) Development of stylesheets
What role do the stylesheets Sebastian is currently maintaining
play for the TEI? Should the TEI charge an effort for revising
them? For creating documentation? Should some of the practice
(values for @rend, table formatting, new attributes ) be integrated
into the Guidelines? and similar questions should be considered.
-----------------------------------------------------

7) Other business (5 minutes)

TBA

8) Meetings: (5 minutes)
Council meeting next year ? when, where

-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Wed Nov 24 2004 - 23:49:24 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Nov 24 23:56:50 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:56:50 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16805.22481.474202.503538@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:56:50 +0900

Syd Bauman edu> writes:
> Disclaimer: I don't run this list, have no true knowledge of how it
> works, and don't recall ever having looked at the
> archives before.
>
Thanks Syd. I had looked at the archives before, but at some point in
April, they stopped working. Now we have them again, at least for the
period from August to now.
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Wed Nov 24 2004 - 23:57:02 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Thu Nov 25 11:47:35 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:47:35 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16806.3239.946187.392030@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:47:35 -0500

> Thanks Syd. I had looked at the archives before, but at some point
> in April, they stopped working. Now we have them again, at least
> for the period from August to now.
Indeed. I'll write to Daniel and see what, if anything, can be done
about the previous archives.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Thu Nov 25 2004 - 11:48:19 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Fri Nov 26 19:16:28 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:16:28 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:16:28 +0900

Dear Councillors,
Syd sent me an additional agenda item, please look at the document. I
will send a revised agenda out in time before the meeting.

> Lou and I would like to add a discussion of bibliographic
> entries. The main discussion is currently at
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/download.php?group_id=106328&atid=644065&file_id=98435&aid=1012350,
> but I hope to have a slightly condensed, slightly easier-to-read
> version available soon.
Document is now at
http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.html
http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.xml

All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Fri Nov 26 2004 - 19:16:43 EST
From Laurent.Romary at loria.fr Sat Nov 27 02:35:57 2004 From: Laurent.Romary at loria.fr (Laurent Romary) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:35:57 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: Message-ID:

From: Laurent Romary
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:35:57 +0100

Dear all,
As I will not be able to attend to conference call (another meeting
planned in Sarrebrucken at that time), I quickly give my view on this
topic:
- I have a strong intuition that the proposal based on biblItem is a
good direction to go (a lot of things are made clearer)
- I do not see why there is a need for relatedBiblItem, where a
recursive biblItem (together with the attributes that are contemplated)
would do the trick, it seems. My main arguments are:
* design simplicity: why two objects with nearly the same semantics
should be so much differentiated
* practicality and coherence: if the relatedBiblItem objects are
described elsewhere in the same or another document, then they are
likely to be described as biblItem. They would thus change nature
depending on whether a reference to them is made in an inline way
(relatedBiblItem) or stand-off way (biblItem)
Best
Laurent
Le 27 nov. 04, ? 01:16, Christian Wittern a ?crit :
>
> Dear Councillors,
>
> Syd sent me an additional agenda item, please look at the document. I
> will send a revised agenda out in time before the meeting.
>
>
>> Lou and I would like to add a discussion of bibliographic
>> entries. The main discussion is currently at
>> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/download.php?
>> group_id=106328&atid=644065&file_id=98435&aid=1012350,
>> but I hope to have a slightly condensed, slightly easier-to-read
>> version available soon.
>
> Document is now at
> http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.html
> http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.xml
>
>
> All the best,
>
> Christian
>
> --
>
> Christian Wittern
> Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
> 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sat Nov 27 2004 - 02:36:39 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sat Nov 27 11:54:38 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 11:54:38 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16808.45390.926712.252510@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 11:54:38 -0500

> As I will not be able to attend to conference call ...
Very sorry you won't make it.

Note: I will try to cross-post the following to Sourceforge, as the
bibliographic folks who wrote this paper can't read this list.

> - I have a strong intuition that the proposal based on biblItem is a
> good direction to go (a lot of things are made clearer)
I think I agree, but I'm not at all clear on how structured the
content of is supposed to be, and thus one whether it
should replace the current , and if so should it be
called or .

> - I do not see why there is a need for relatedBiblItem, where a
> recursive biblItem (together with the attributes that are
> contemplated) would do the trick, it seems.
Even in those situations where the is not nested
within the to which it's related, isn't the target=
attribute (which perhaps should be called related=) on
sufficient to show this relationship?

> My main arguments are:
> * design simplicity: why two objects with nearly the same semantics
> should be so much differentiated
> * practicality and coherence: if the relatedBiblItem objects are
> described elsewhere in the same or another document, then they are
> likely to be described as biblItem. They would thus change nature
> depending on whether a reference to them is made in an inline way
> (relatedBiblItem) or stand-off way (biblItem)
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sat Nov 27 2004 - 11:55:19 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sat Nov 27 14:56:19 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 14:56:19 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A25183.4030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16808.56291.675413.858516@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 14:56:19 -0500

> ...
>
>
>
> select="key('IDS',substring-after(@target,'#'))" mode="xref"/>
>
> ....
Sorry, my XSLT just isn't that good. Some things I don't understand.

The test here checks that the first character of the value
of the target= attribute is "#". Is that sufficient? We haven't
agreed on the details yet, but the suggestion was that target= be
declared as either
xsd:anyURI # for P4 IDREF
or
list { xsd:anyURI+ } # for P4 IDREFS
Will a conforming processor have already handled whitespace issues?
Although I found no prose to that effect, if I read the schema
provided in target="http://www.w3c.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#schema">XML Schema Part 2:
Datatypes correctly, it should, at least for xsd:anyURI.
(Search for the string "anyURI.whitespace".)
I realize I didn't ask for sample code to handle the new version of
IDREFS, but I am a bit concerned about leading & trailing whitespace
for a RelaxNG list. target="http://books.xmlschemata.org/relaxng/ch09s09.html">The
book doesn't really say either way. I suppose it's worth a tiny
test, and we can at least see what particular processors do. Perhaps
I'll try to whip one up later today.

select="key('IDS',substring-after(@target,'#'))"
mode="xref"
Here I'm a bit lost. The first line selects all nodes for which the
IDS key matches the value of target= after the "#". So supposedly
somewhere there's some code to set the key for each element to its
xml:id= value, right? I'm guessing the mode=xref business tells XSLT
which of several possible modes to use when processing the templates
that are selected -- I'm guessing that if no 'xref' mode is defined
for a template that is selected, nothing happens.

Maybe I should ask for a more specific example. We have a drama
encoded as follows.
P4
-- Colonel Juan Peron Col. P.
...
P5 -- Colonel Juan Peron Col. P.
...
In both cases we want to ignore elements and precede each element with [content of correct here]: How much more complicated is the P5 code than the P4 code? (I realize that if users start doing things like who="ftp://my.project.server/authLists/dramaRoles.xml#jp", or who="https://my.project.server/authList.xml#xpath(//div[@type='roles']/div[@n='Evita']/role[7]) that processing will be much more complicated. But the fact that processing for new functionality may not be easy doesn't give me hives they way that my concern that processing what used to be easy (the Col. Peron case, above) will become hard does.) _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sat Nov 27 2004 - 14:56:58 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 08:10:29 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:10:29 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16808.56291.675413.858516@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A9CE45.4060702@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:10:29 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>
>Sorry, my XSLT just isn't that good. Some things I don't understand.
>
>
>
>The test here checks that the first character of the value
>of the target= attribute is "#". Is that sufficient? We haven't
>agreed on the details yet, but the suggestion was that target= be
>declared as either
> xsd:anyURI # for P4 IDREF
>or
> list { xsd:anyURI+ } # for P4 IDREFS
>Will a conforming processor have already handled whitespace issues?
>
>
>
oh, sorry, I didn't realize you meant you needed a solution to handle
multiple targets. handling space-separated targets would need a call to
(extension function)
exslt:tokenize, or wait for XSLT2
but thats the same as it is now, isn't it? if XSLT has some special
code for handling IDREFS, I at least have never used it. Though
I suspect my stylesheets have never had to handle IDREFS anyway.
>I realize I didn't ask for sample code to handle the new version of
>IDREFS, but I am a bit concerned about leading & trailing whitespace
>for a RelaxNG list.
>
>
a quick "normalize-space()" around the @target should clear that up
> select="key('IDS',substring-after(@target,'#'))"
> mode="xref"
>
>Here I'm a bit lost. The first line selects all nodes for which the
>IDS key matches the value of target= after the "#".
>
yup.
>So supposedly
>somewhere there's some code to set the key for each element to its
>xml:id= value, right?
>

>I'm guessing the mode=xref business tells XSLT
>which of several possible modes to use when processing the templates
>that are selected -- I'm guessing that if no 'xref' mode is defined
>for a template that is selected, nothing happens.
>
>
no; if no mode is defined, it uses default rules (which isn't what you
want).
so you have a fallback

which returns a way of getting to any particular element
(it may return an error code, of course).
>
>
> Colonel Juan Peron
>
>
>
>
> Col. P.
>
...

>
>
>
>In both cases we want to ignore elements and precede each
> element with
> [content of correct here]:
>
>
>
(untested)

apart from the substring-after thing, this is
exactly what I'd have done for P4 too.
but wasn't this all discussed in SO? when you agreed on the syntax, you
must have had some ideas of the algorithms for processing it?
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 08:17:04 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 10:10:27 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:10:27 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16808.56291.675413.858516@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A9EA63.60600@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:10:27 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>I realize I didn't ask for sample code to handle the new version of
>IDREFS, but I am a bit concerned about leading & trailing whitespace
>for a RelaxNG list.
>target="http://books.xmlschemata.org/relaxng/ch09s09.html">The
>book doesn't really say either way.
>
by the way, remember that the Relax NG processor is orthogonal.
The fact that the schema says "a b c " is a "list" has no impact
on XSLT processing. To the XML parser "a b c" is "a b c",
no more no less. A processor might read the schema to assist
in the processing, but the XML parser won't be offering help.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 10:16:43 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 12:29:32 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:29:32 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41AA0AFC.5080205@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:29:32 +0000

Laurent Romary wrote:
> - I do not see why there is a need for relatedBiblItem, where a
> recursive biblItem (together with the attributes that are
> contemplated) would do the trick, it seems. My main

I agree with this, after an admittedly fairly quick read.
seems unnecessary.
I'd also like to see the use of the target attribute spelt out in
examples. do I
say

Thaller, Manfred
A Draft Proposal for a Standard for the Coding of Machine Readable Sources

? though in that case it isn't clear why I would not use

In general, I think that this sort of proposal is a good way to go, but
it looks
premature for a Council decision now. It's such a complicated area,
where interchange and compatibility is even more important than usual.
I want to see concrete proof of interchange, to ensure (for example)
that the work
being done in OpenOffice is compatible.
I also wonder, naturally, whether the TEI should be working in this area
of structured bibliographies. We could just suggest that people
code stuff in the MODS namespace.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk do _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 12:35:49 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sun Nov 28 13:06:16 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:06:16 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] TEI Council telephone conference on Monday, Nov 29th, 2004 at 1300 UTC In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16810.5016.577412.894677@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:06:16 -0500

> ... conference call the TEI Council will hold ... this coming
> Monday, Nov 29th, 2004 at 1300 UTC.
For local times, see
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?year=2004&month=11&day=29&hour=13&min=0&sec=0
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 13:06:57 EST
From david.durand at ingenta.com Sun Nov 28 13:36:26 2004 From: david.durand at ingenta.com (David G. Durand) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:36:26 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] ** conference call instructions have changed ** Message-ID: <69ABDF16-416C-11D9-A148-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com>

From: David G. Durand
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:36:26 -0500

This is the same as the last call, but not the same as the instructions
Christian just posted!
Ingenta has changed their conference calling service to one that
reduces the cost to European participants.
The new instructions are as follows:
Call the conferencing service:
US (toll free): 1-866-722 8225
UK (toll-free): 0800 953 1275
Other International callers must call a regular UK number:
+44 1452 555 499
Should you want to call the toll number from within the UK, you would
dial: (0) 1452 555 499
when you are connected enter a PIN number:
520522#
It then asks you to state your name followed by a #. This announces you
to the list, and is probably worth doing.
---------
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council

David G. Durand
Director, Electronic Publishing Services
Ingenta Inc.
111R Chestnut St.
Providence, RI 02903 USA
T: +1 401-331-2014 x111
T: +1 401-935-5317 Mobile
E: david.durand_at_ingenta.com
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 13:37:08 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sun Nov 28 13:54:57 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:54:57 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A9EA63.60600@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16810.7937.79731.691508@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:54:57 -0500

> oh, sorry, I didn't realize you meant you needed a solution to handle
> multiple targets.
No apologies -- you were right not to realize it, it wasn't really
part of the original request. :-)

> but thats the same as it [handling IDREFS with exslt or waiting for
> XSLT2] is now, isn't it?
I think so, but I'm not sure. (Which is why I'm asking.)

> a quick "normalize-space()" around the @target should clear that up
Ah, OK. Thanks.

>
OK, thanks.

> no; if no mode is defined, it uses default rules (which isn't
> what you want). so you have a fallback
>
OK, thanks.

> apart from the substring-after thing, this is exactly what I'd
> have done for P4 too.
Roger, that's the information I was looking for. Thanks.

> but wasn't this all discussed in SO? when you agreed on the
> syntax, you must have had some ideas of the algorithms for
> processing it?
Yes and no. Let's discuss it over a beer (orange Fanta :-) someday.

> by the way, remember that the Relax NG processor is orthogonal. The
> fact that the schema says "a b c " is a "list" has no impact on
> XSLT processing. To the XML parser "a b c" is "a b c", no more no
> less. A processor might read the schema to assist in the
> processing, but the XML parser won't be offering help.
Right, good point. Thanks for reminding me.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 13:55:35 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sun Nov 28 14:14:58 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 14:14:58 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: <41AA0AFC.5080205@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16810.9138.216440.885040@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 14:14:58 -0500

> I'd also like to see the use of the target attribute spelt out in
> examples ...
Me too.

> In general, I think that this sort of proposal is a good way to
> go, but it looks premature for a Council decision now.
We (at least I) am not looking for a Council decision of "yes, do it
this way" or not -- I am looking for the Council to at least
contribute substantially to the discussion, and, if needed, to wade
in, roll their sleeves up, and work the issues out and come up with
what TEI should do. That is, because (I feel) this single issue does
not merit an entire WG being chartered, it's Council's job to work it
out.

> I want to see concrete proof of interchange, to ensure (for
> example) that the work being done in OpenOffice is compatible.
I don't know anything about what work is being done in OpenOffice,
but I don't understand at first blush why TEI should be concerned
about it.
I think in general we should be looking how to encode things
properly, and only ask about concrete details like implementations
and compatibility when considering different "correct" approaches.
I.e., it's important not to compromise good encoding for current
pragmatics.

> I also wonder, naturally, whether the TEI should be working in
> this area of structured bibliographies. We could just suggest
> that people code stuff in the MODS namespace.
I've never used MODS. Can anyone comment on this?
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 14:15:36 EST
From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Sun Nov 28 15:30:31 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Flanders, Julia) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:30:31 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: <[tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem)> Message-ID: <1A97D3D73A03FC419D87967D3CE4760C4BC9CD@MAIL1.AD.Brown.Edu>

From: Flanders, Julia
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:30:31 -0500

>From a quick look at MODS, I think the differences are sufficient to make a TEI element useful. MODS is aimed at cataloguing things, not at creating bibliographic entries, and its approach to the information is much more detailed in a way that's not likely to be intuitive for non-librarians. The digital libraries folks might prefer to use MODS (and presumably they can do so regardless) but for other TEI users I think it's helpful to have a simpler scheme that reflects the way they're accustomed to thinking about bibliographic entries.
I like the nesting in the new proposal; the relationships between the various and elements in the old system always struck me as opaque, esp. when dealing with anything more complex than an article in a journal.
Julia
-----Original Message-----
From: tei-council-bounces_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU on behalf of Syd Bauman
Sent: Sun 11/28/04 14:14
To: tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
Subject: Re: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem)
> I also wonder, naturally, whether the TEI should be working in
> this area of structured bibliographies. We could just suggest
> that people code stuff in the MODS namespace.
I've never used MODS. Can anyone comment on this?
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 15:31:13 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 15:33:41 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:33:41 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: <16810.9138.216440.885040@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41AA3625.5010504@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:33:41 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>
> That is, because (I feel) this single issue does
>not merit an entire WG being chartered, it's Council's job to work it
>out.
>
>
>
you could argue that Council should charter the "using the TEI for
new documents" workgroup, and that would include bibliographies
>I don't know anything about what work is being done in OpenOffice,
>but I don't understand at first blush why TEI should be concerned
>about it.
>
>
OO is an example of another communuty working in exactly the same area,
marking up bibliographies. The reason we should be concerned is that
the main use of this in the TEI world (I assume) is for bibliographies
in metadata or new documents; and that means interaction with other systems.
Its not a maybe, its an essential (in my mind) to be able to interact
with bibliographical databases like Endnote.
>I think in general we should be looking how to encode things
>properly, and only ask about concrete details like implementations
>and compatibility when considering different "correct" approaches.
>I.e., it's important not to compromise good encoding for current
>pragmatics.
>
>
I agree in principle, but it's the large and active worlds
of a) people doing bibliographical database software, and b) the
MODS-like librarians, who are making the running in this area.
IMHO :-}
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 15:39:57 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 16:06:12 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:06:12 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] report re META Message-ID: <41AA3DC4.4040004@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:06:12 +0000

There has not been any radical activity on the META front since the last
Council phone call.
The decision made then was to consolidate the ODD format by working on
the processors,
so many revisions have been made to Roma and the ODD-processing XSLT
stylesheets.
The results have been contained in CD distributions made for the members
meeting,
a course run by Lou and Laurent in Tunis, and a course run by James and
Sebastian
in London. Roma is now becoming increasingly stable as it gets more
thorough testing.
There are two major activities to undertake in the next 3 months:
1. Assuming the Council agrees to switch to @xml:id etc, the processing
system for ODDs will
require an important revision and re-testing.
2. The class system can now be overhauled, with each class being examined
for
* naming
* function
* membership
It is proposed to convene an ad hoc working party to
do this in a concentrated face to face meeting.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 16:12:28 EST
From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 16:40:41 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:40:41 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] ** conference call instructions have changed ** In-Reply-To: <69ABDF16-416C-11D9-A148-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Message-ID: <41AA45D9.4020804@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:40:41 +0000

Thanks for the reminder David.
Advance warning that Sebastian and I have another committment which
means we will have to leave the call at 1400 sharp....
Lou

David G. Durand wrote:
> This is the same as the last call, but not the same as the instructions
> Christian just posted!
>
> Ingenta has changed their conference calling service to one that
> reduces the cost to European participants.
>
> The new instructions are as follows:
>
> Call the conferencing service:
>
> US (toll free): 1-866-722 8225
> UK (toll-free): 0800 953 1275
> Other International callers must call a regular UK number:
> +44 1452 555 499
>
> Should you want to call the toll number from within the UK, you would
> dial: (0) 1452 555 499
>
> when you are connected enter a PIN number:
> 520522#
>
> It then asks you to state your name followed by a #. This announces you
> to the list, and is probably worth doing.
> ---------
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
>
>
> David G. Durand
> Director, Electronic Publishing Services
> Ingenta Inc.
> 111R Chestnut St.
> Providence, RI 02903 USA
>
> T: +1 401-331-2014 x111
> T: +1 401-935-5317 Mobile
> E: david.durand_at_ingenta.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 16:35:47 EST
From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 16:48:42 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:48:42 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: xml:lang attribute and P5 RNG schemas] Message-ID: <41AA47BA.8010409@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:48:42 +0000

The appended note to TEI-L reminds me that the current draft for P5 is a
bit noncommittal on the subject of xml:lang
I think we ought to try to decide
(a) whether P5 should say that xml:lang *replaces* lang or may be used
as an alternative
(b) whether the declared value of xml:lang should be IDREF or CDATA
At present the draft for CH recommends a particular way of constructing
values for xml:lang which is derived from relevant standards: it has the
status of a WG recommendation but has not yet been formally approved by
the Council.
For the record my vote is
(a) lang should be replaced by xml:lang
(b) it is CDATA
Lou

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: xml:lang attribute and P5 RNG schemas
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:10:08 +0000
From: Peter Heslin ECLIPSE.CO.UK>
Reply-To: public_at_HESLIN.ECLIPSE.CO.UK
To: TEI-L_at_LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU
I am using Emacs nxml-mode to edit TEI documents, and I am using the
pre-release version of the Relax NG schemas that I downloaded from the
TEI web-site. Somewhere on that site,[1] I read that P5 will recommend
using the standard xml:lang attribute rather than a TEI-defined lang
attribute. So I tried that, but nxml-mode complains that xml:lang is
not a valid attribute.
Sure enough, the TEI schemas do not declare xml:lang, whereas, for
example, the XHTML schema that comes with nxml-mode does declare it.
It seems odd to me that it should be necessary to declare an attribute
defined by the XML specification itself. So it may be that this is a
bug in nxml-mode rather than in the P5 schema. Three possibilities
occur to me:
1) I am mistaken in using xml:lang rather than lang in TEI P5, or
perhaps the switch to xml:lang has not become official yet.
2) This is a bug in nxml-mode, which should always allow the xml:lang
attribute in any element; it should be removed from the XHTML
schema.
3) This is a bug in the P5 schema; xml:lang should be declared by
schemas that want to use it.
Best wishes,
Peter
[1] I can't remember where I saw this, but google gives this abstract:
http://www.hum.gu.se/allcach2004/AP/html/prop142.html

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 16:43:51 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 16:41:39 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:41:39 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: xml:lang attribute and P5 RNG schemas] In-Reply-To: <41AA47BA.8010409@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41AA4613.8060506@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:41:39 +0000

Lou Burnard wrote:
>
> I think we ought to try to decide
> (a) whether P5 should say that xml:lang *replaces* lang or may be
> used as an alternative
did the WG really not make a recommendation on this?
> (b) whether the declared value of xml:lang should be IDREF or CDATA
>
I'd say it should be datatype.Key, ie CDATA, with the recommendation
"It is expected that the set of possible values will
be defined in the document header"

-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 16:47:53 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 28 17:48:41 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:48:41 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] ** conference call instructions have changed ** In-Reply-To: <69ABDF16-416C-11D9-A148-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:48:41 +0900

"David G. Durand" com> writes:
> This is the same as the last call, but not the same as the instructions
> Christian just posted!
Oops, sorry, I mixed it up again. The updated agenda I plan to post
in five minutes will have it. I would also like to remind everybody
that we need to look at a new conference hosting service and thank
David for hosting this past year without a cent of cost to the TEI!
If anybody can host a conference call like this through its
institution, please step forward and make us an offer!

Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 17:49:01 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 28 17:56:19 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:56:19 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: xml:lang attribute and P5 RNG schemas] In-Reply-To: <41AA4613.8060506@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:56:19 +0900

Sebastian Rahtz oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> Lou Burnard wrote:
>
>>
>> I think we ought to try to decide
>> (a) whether P5 should say that xml:lang *replaces* lang or may be
>> used as an alternative
>
> did the WG really not make a recommendation on this?
My memory says the WG was non-commital and thought this should be
decided by the council (though maybe based on some material provided
by the WG). The draft text decidedly leaves open, but tacitly assumes
some kind of alignment with xml:lang by using the same mechanism for
constructing the attribute value for *:lang.
>
>> (b) whether the declared value of xml:lang should be IDREF or CDATA
>>
> I'd say it should be datatype.Key, ie CDATA, with the recommendation
> "It is expected that the set of possible values will
> be defined in the document header"
Which is a nightmare for document interchange. Going with xml:lang,
but with a reference to would give you essentially the
same, but those who understand xml:lang could proceed right away.
My vote is as follows:
xml:lang
value: formally CDATA, but in fact as spelled out in the draft [can this be formally checked?]

Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 17:56:32 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 28 17:57:20 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:57:20 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] ** conference call instructions have changed ** In-Reply-To: <41AA45D9.4020804@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:57:20 +0900

Lou Burnard oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> Thanks for the reminder David.
>
> Advance warning that Sebastian and I have another committment which
> means we will have to leave the call at 1400 sharp....
So we have to try to stick to the agenda as strictly as possible. It
would also be good if everybody tries to be there early, so that we
can start on time.
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 17:57:33 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 28 18:03:39 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:03:39 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] updated agenda for call on nov 29, 1300 UTC Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:03:39 +0900

TEI Council Members and Editors:
This is the agenda for the conference call the TEI Council will hold
later this coming Monday, Nov 29th, 2004 at 1300 UTC. Please try to
call in early, so that we can start on time.
Please read through the following, in advance of the call.

INSTRUCTIONS for conference call (updated!!):
Call the conferencing service:
US (toll free): 1-866-722 8225
UK (toll-free): 0800 953 1275
Other International callers must call a regular UK number:
+44 1452 555 499
Should you want to call the toll number from within the UK, you would
dial: (0) 1452 555 499
when you are connected enter a PIN number:
520522#

Expected members to participate:
Syd Bauman, Alejandro Bia, David Birnbaum, Lou Burnard, Matthew
Driscoll, David Durand, Julia Flanders, Sebastian Rahtz, Laurent
Romary, Natasha Smith, Susan Schreibman, Edward Vanhoutte, Perry
Willett, Christian Wittern.
Welcome to participate are also
James Cummings and John Walsh

Agenda:
8 items, not more than 15 minutes apiece.
-----------------------------------------------------

1) Review of the minutes from the call of Sep. 20th (5 min)
Minutes of the meeting are at
http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html. Review of action items,
progress.

2) Short report from the MM2004 (5 min, Lou Burnard)
-----------------------------------------------------
3) Sanskrit taskforce report (5 min):
Please read
http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/CE/cew12.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------

4) Rollcall on the active WGs (15 min) :
Standoff (SOW09), Manuscripts, Feature Structures, Physical Bibliography,
Meta Language
-----------------------------------------------------
5) xml-colon-thing (15 min)

How should xml:id, xml:lang be handled? See the discussion on
tei-council in the last weeks.
-----------------------------------------------------
6) Development of stylesheets
What role do the stylesheets Sebastian is currently maintaining
play for the TEI? Should the TEI charge an effort for revising
them? For creating documentation? Should some of the practice
(values for @rend, table formatting, new attributes ) be integrated
into the Guidelines? and similar questions should be considered.
-----------------------------------------------------

7) BiblItem, (10 minutes)
please see
http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.html
http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.xml

We basically need to decide wether to charge some activity on this
or proceed with it within the Council. My recommendation would be
to ask a small group (1-3 persons, not necessarily all from the
council) to make a survey of existing practice & developments and
give us some recommendations on how to proceed. There is the OO
development, but also refdb and MODS which work in a similar area.

8) Other business (5 minutes)

TBA

9) Meetings: (5 minutes)
Council meeting next year ? when, where
Conference call setup?

-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 18:03:53 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Sun Nov 28 23:26:06 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:26:06 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: xml:lang attribute and P5 RNG schemas] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16810.42206.902868.80511@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:26:06 -0500

I don't think the WG was non-committal on this at all. The WG was
completely firm (with 1 dissent) on using xml:lang=. The WG was a
little less firm (3 explicit votes in favor, no dissension) on how
the value of xml:lang= would be (optionally) associated with a
in the header. The 3 explicit votes all favored the plan
I brought up in Ghent, namely that should bear a
(required?) ident= attribute, and the value of xml:lang= would be
compared to it.
The WG made no suggestion as to the type of attribute xml:lang= would
be, but I have always presumed we would declare it as tei.langtag or
some such, which in turn would be declared to be as close as we could
get to an RFC 3066 language tag. I.e., in DTD language it would be
CDATA, if we could use RelaxNG directly it would be xsd:language, a
datatype defined by W3C Schema just for this[1]. The only minor catch
is that it is defined as RFC 3066 language tags, and by the time P5
comes out there may be a successor to 3066. I think we should presume
W3C will follow suit relatively quickly (they did move from 1766 to
3066 when that happened, I think).
Note
---- [1] See http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#language. _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 23:26:45 EST
From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Mon Nov 29 06:26:57 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:26:57 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Apologies In-Reply-To: <16810.5016.577412.894677@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41AB0781.30302@kantl.be>

From: Edward Vanhoutte
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:26:57 +0100

Dear All,
I'm sorry I won't be able to attend todays' conference call. I'll be in
an urgent meeting with our prime minister over the plan of our minister
of culture to put the building of the Royal Academy up for sale.
Sorry about this.
The building of the Royal Academy is still available, however, for
Council meetings etc. But maybe we should take a look at the residency
of the council members to take a lowest-cost decision on the next face
to face meeting?
Best,
Edward
-- ================ Edward Vanhoutte Co-ordinator Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies Reviews Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 edward dot vanhoutte at kantl dot be http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 06:24:56 EST
From mjd at hum.ku.dk Mon Nov 29 06:42:32 2004 From: mjd at hum.ku.dk (M. J. Driscoll) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:42:32 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Apologies In-Reply-To: <41AB0781.30302@kantl.be> Message-ID: <41AB1938.24469.C994BC@localhost>

From: M. J. Driscoll
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:42:32 +0100

Well, if they're determined to sell, perhaps the TEI should
consider buying. I think the building of the Royal Academy
would make a fine permanent home for the TEI. Good central
location, excellent restaurants, plenty of beer. Think
about it.
MJD
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 06:41:58 EST
From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Mon Nov 29 08:08:15 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:08:15 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] report, very late, from PB WG Message-ID:

From: Julia Flanders
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:08:15 -0500

I have just received email from Terry Catapano indicating that a
brief summary of progress to date on the PB workgroup may be found at:
http://www.columbia.edu/~thc4/tei-pb/summary.html
Julia
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 08:08:51 EST
From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Mon Nov 29 11:08:31 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:08:31 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] sourceforge project monitoring Message-ID:

From: Julia Flanders
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:08:31 -0500

I just checked on the SourceForge site, and apparently the project
monitoring Lou describes is available only with a paid subscription
(US$39.90). While this isn't a lot, it may not be something all
Council members feel like paying, nor is it something the TEI should
require of its Council members.
Instead, I suggest that Council members should probably make a habit
of checking the SourceForge site once a week to see whether there are
new feature requests, and should sign up to be notified of
changes/new postings to any of those features in which they feel an
ongoing interest.
Best wishes, Julia
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 11:09:03 EST
From pwillett at umich.edu Mon Nov 29 11:16:59 2004 From: pwillett at umich.edu (Perry Willett) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:16:59 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Hosting a TEI council meeting In-Reply-To: <41AB0781.30302@kantl.be> Message-ID: <001901c4d62e$dd93b0e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA>

From: Perry Willett
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:16:59 -0500

I'd be happy to host the next Council meeting here in Ann Arbor at the
University of Michigan. We're a half-hour from the Detroit airport (DTW), a
major hub for Northwest airlines. There are plenty of lodging opportunities
near campus, although the hotels nearest campus are somewhat pricey:
$130-160 night. There are nearby b&b's that are good, and hotels slightly
farther out that are much less expensive.
Plenty of good restaurants etc. More at
If we were to come here, we would want to do it after the commencement
ceremony, when students have cleared out. Commencement is April 29-May 1,
and there won't be any hotel rooms to be found for that weekend, so sometime
after that would be the only option.
Perry Willett
University of Michigan
pwillett_at_umich.edu

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 11:17:16 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 11:31:32 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:31:32 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Hosting a TEI council meeting In-Reply-To: <001901c4d62e$dd93b0e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> Message-ID: <41AB4EE4.1000005@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:31:32 +0000

I will almost certainly be unable to get to the council meeting in May,
wherever it is held, as I expect to be in East Timor in April and May.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 11:37:58 EST
From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Mon Nov 29 12:15:47 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:15:47 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets Message-ID:

From: Julia Flanders
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:15:47 -0500

I was asked to put together a proposal for how the TEI might handle a
call for stylesheets. I have two proposals to suggest:
1. The Contest
This option would require more input from the TEI, since it requires
a group of judges, and would generate more buzz and perhaps a better
outcome.
The TEI would announce a contest to produce TEI stylesheets. A set of
requirements would be posted (e.g. must include documentation, must
handle a minimum set of elements, etc.). The contest could be broken
down into categories:
--"model" (i.e. a configurable template)
--general
--drama
--verse
--academic writing (grant proposals, reports, academic papers)
--dictionaries
--etc.
Contestants would submit stylesheets in one or more of these
categories, conforming to the requirements posted. The judging
committee would review all submissions, and would award a prize for
best in each category, based on criteria such as clarity of
documentation, comprehensiveness, attractiveness, etc. The prize
could just be recognition, or could be a copy of P4, or a one-year
paid subscription to SourceForge, or something of that nature. All
submissions would be made available on the TEI web site. Perhaps,
given the desirability of the "model" category, an especially
valuable prize could be offered--e.g. a free one-year div3 membership
to the institution of your choice?
2. The PRFSS
This option is much simpler; it just involves issuing a persuasive
request for stylesheets. Projects that have developed stylesheets for
their own use would be encouraged (begged) to submit them, along with
documentation of what they do and a brief abstract indicating their
range of usefulness. A minimum set of requirements would be posted.
Note that this call for stylesheets interlocks nicely with the call
for TEI samples, which was discussed at both the TEI Tools SIG and
the TEI Education SIG. Having a set of sample documents would make it
easier for people to test their stylesheets, and would also provide a
basis for judging the stylesheets submitted, in the case of the
contest.
Best wishes, Julia
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 12:16:22 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Nov 29 13:18:54 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:18:54 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call Message-ID: <16811.26638.200850.729968@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:18:54 -0500

The first draft of the notes from this morning's conference call are
now available at
http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm14.html
http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm14.xml
As always please read over and post any corrections.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 13:19:35 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 13:16:53 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:16:53 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41AB6795.8030106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:16:53 +0000

For those of us who had to leave early, can you summarize the rationale?
At first sight, this
is a slightly strange request. Writing a set of stylesheets to render
TEI documents well
is a serious exercise in software engineering, not a weekend bit of fun
to win a competition :-}
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 13:23:14 EST
From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 14:16:58 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:16:58 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: <16811.26638.200850.729968@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41AB75AA.4070806@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:16:58 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
> The first draft of the notes from this morning's conference call are
> now available at
> http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm14.html
> http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm14.xml
>
> As always please read over and post any corrections.
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
Amazing fast turn round!
Some suggested corrections:
Under Finalize draft of MS:
"but concern was expressed that there has been no response to some of
the detailed comments that have been made."
-> Council agreed that once the draft was publicized, comments on it
should receive rapid attention from the MS taskforce.
"Councilors" (passim) -> "Council members" (for consistency)
"suggested that Councilors should look at items in the
order they personally prefer"
-> "suggesting that Council members should feel free to look at and
comment on any items in which they were personally interested"
"available on the web" (add xref to
www.tei-c.org/Members/2004-Baltimore/ maybe?)
I would delete: "SB thought there
was a reason for some, if not all, of these apparent
discrepancies, but could not recall them. "
"xpointer schemes, if which discussion was deferred."
-> xpointer schemes, concerning which discussion was deferred. (till
when? should probly be an action point
I think describing Sebastian's stylesheets as a "problem" is pretty
cheeky but that's not relevant. On a matter of fact: yes the source
forge version is the only one which is currently being maintained, and
so any residual ones on the website should certainly be tidied up.
Likewise e.g. tei-emacs which I was about to do this morning when I had
to rush off to do something else...
"It was suggested that a small group to look at the broader
view around this issue"
insert "be formed" maybe? And I thought the point was not to have more
broader discussion but to decide on whether or not the proposal is
acceptable as it stands?
"It was noted that we do not know who, other than PT, participated in
the creation of the current proposal."
Andreas Nolde and Bruce d'Arblay chiefly, I think. Isn't it in the
discussion log, which you (I thought) were a member of?

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 14:11:56 EST
From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Mon Nov 29 14:25:51 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:25:51 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: <41AB6795.8030106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Julia Flanders
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:25:51 -0500

The motivation was a desire to offer a wider range of stylesheets
that work with TEI than are currently available at the TEI web site,
and to do so with as little cost to the TEI as possible. We assumed
that there are by now a number of examples out there; projects have
presumably developed stylesheets for their own use, which could be
rendered sharable without too much effort.
There's also the possibility that making this a sort of community
project would motivate people to make and share improvements on the
most promising samples. ("perfect, if only it did XYZ...")
So I wasn't imagining that people would whip up a stylesheet just for
the competition, but that they would take something they already have
and document and/or polish it for sharing purposes.
>For those of us who had to leave early, can you summarize the
>rationale? At first sight, this
>is a slightly strange request. Writing a set of stylesheets to
>render TEI documents well
>is a serious exercise in software engineering, not a weekend bit of
>fun to win a competition :-}
>
>--
>Sebastian Rahtz
>Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services
>13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
>
>OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service
>http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 14:26:27 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 15:10:49 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:10:49 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41AB8249.1060400@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:10:49 +0000

Julia Flanders wrote:
>
> There's also the possibility that making this a sort of community
> project would motivate people to make and share improvements on the
> most promising samples. ("perfect, if only it did XYZ...")
>
> So I wasn't imagining that people would whip up a stylesheet just for
> the competition, but that they would take something they already have
> and document and/or polish it for sharing purposes.
If I wear my open source hat, I don't think this is very efficient way
to proceed. If we end up with 10 stylesheets
by 10 different people, written in 10 different coding styles, covering
10 different areas of the TEI,
with 10 different copyright notices, what then? How do you compare them?
Who are the judges?
It would be much better for people to join in a single community project
and contribute according to their ability,
I think.
I stress the issue of licensing. If a stylesheet written by A N Other is
posted on the TEI web site,
it needs an open source license to be of practical uses to other
projects. Better, the copyright would
be donated to the TEI, so that we can guard the IPR for future generations.
Since I didn't take part in the conversation, I find it hard to
understand what people were thinking
they really wanted here. The minutes say "Council discussed the problem
of SR's style-sheets and the dichotomy
that they serve both as an example and what the TEI itself uses". I
suggest that this dichotomy
is entirely illusory: the stylesheets are NOT intended as an example of
TEI XSLT programming at all,
but as a serious contribution for real use. The idea of them as an
"example" is a piece of mischievous whimsy
spread by Michael Beddow; they are _not_ written as a master class in
obscure XSLT to challenge
future generations! The dichotomy is between their twin parentage of
what I provide and maintain
for my local department, and what I wrote with NSF funding for the TEI.
Possibly in retrospect it was a bad
idea to make the stylesheets for the TEIC depend on the ones for Oxford.
It seems to me that there are two very different problems here:
a) we need more examples of TEI-processing software for people to
study and get ideas from.
we definitely want to encourage people to show their work. I
personally dislike the idea of a
competition, but its a possible way to proceed.
b) we (the TEIC) own the copyright[1] of all the XSLT code which I
maintain on Sourceforge, and
we need it for our internal work (viz, producing the Guidelines); but
those stylesheets are not
well-documented, and their parameterized interface is fairly
off-putting as a result. We need to
decide whether the TEI really wants this sorted out, and take a more
positive fatherhood role over its
bastard child, or whether to leave them as is as internal tools which
the editorial process uses.

I don't think you solve problem b) with the solution to problem a). So
which do we care about more?
Just to clear up a misunderstanding, by the way, the stylesheet releases
on the TEI Web site
are the last version which I wanted to release publicly. I have not
neglected this, it is
intentional. I am currently in the throes of making the stylesheets do
the right thing
with xml:id and @target, so they are in a mess right now.
[1] its rather important that this be the case, as otherwise I'd have
problems with IPR at Oxford. long
story.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 15:17:11 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 15:24:09 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:24:09 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41AB8569.1010705@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:24:09 +0000

Apropos of nothing, this needs to qualify what the stylesheets are to _do_.
To make HTML/XHTML? XSL FO? LaTeX? groff? RTF? OpenOffice? CSV files?
It would also be nice to kickstart TEI P5, by getting software
capable of processing P5 files, but maybe thats a little
ambitious just yet. I am afraid I manage this rather mechanistically
by writing the stylesheets ready for P5, and then dumbing them down
to P4 with a gross Perl script.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 15:30:01 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 15:28:38 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:28:38 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] sans critters Message-ID: <41AB8676.9060401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:28:38 +0000

Does anyone have the source of the Sanskrit folks document
which was discussed today? or even just the PDF to hand?
I want to extract the examples and use them for testing.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 15:34:58 EST
From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 15:57:18 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:57:18 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] sans critters In-Reply-To: <41AB8676.9060401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41AB8D2E.9010502@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:57:18 +0000

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> Does anyone have the source of the Sanskrit folks document
> which was discussed today? or even just the PDF to hand?
>
> I want to extract the examples and use them for testing.
>
We havent been given the source, but the PDF is on the website and
linked from the agenda: //TEI/web/Activities/CE/cew12.pdf

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 15:52:14 EST
From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Mon Nov 29 16:52:02 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:52:02 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: <41AB8249.1060400@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Julia Flanders
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:52:02 -0500

Sebastian, you're right, one stipulation would need to be that the
donor of any stylesheet gives permission for general use in some
standard way specified by the TEI. I assume we have such an
arrangement where applicable for any TEI tool or stylesheet currently
made available via our site, and that we would continue to do so.
This is not an obstacle, just a thing to remember.
The point of the contest was not primarily to make a big deal of
adjudicating among the contestants, but to provide a bit of fun to
motivate people to contribute. So the questions of how you compare
them and who are the judges is not really central here. It's just a
front for a community project (a heap of style sheets that can serve
as the basis for further development and improvement), a foolish game
to motivate the activity. But if we don't like the idea of the
competition, then there's no need to use it. Just requesting that
people donate stylesheets would also be fine.
I should also stress that I think having 10 different people
contributing stylesheets on 10 different areas of the TEI is a good
thing--this kind of diversity would be a good way to give people more
options, more examples of possible approaches. Having 10 different
coding styles might or might not be a problem; I don't know enough
about XSLT to know whether this would be illuminating for comparison
purposes, or just a hassle. However, since we're working with donated
materials here, we're scarcely in a position to complain, unless
"difference" means "broken". If there are particular problems or
approaches that we want to exclude we could include this in the RFP.
Concerning your last point--although the TEI stylesheets, as you say,
are designed for internal use, the fact that they're distributed with
OxyGen has given them an unintended status. The goal of the
solicitation proposal was to place these stylesheets in a larger
context of possibilities, and to reduce people's reliance on them. At
the moment, people use them for things they're not intended for, just
because they're handy. It would be great if we had more options to
show people. My personal feeling is that the TEI probably doesn't
want to try to create "official" stylesheets--that the better
approach is to offer people a bunch of samples, and to encourage
people to create samples that are as good as possible. If people want
to work on the current TEI stylesheets in an open-source spirit,
modify them, etc., I think that would be great, but I personally
wouldn't be in favor of focusing on these stylesheets instead of
calling for broader community input and samples.
Anyway--it sounds as if this is one vote against the competition but
in favor of soliciting donated stylesheets...?
At 8:10 PM +0000 11/29/04, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>Julia Flanders wrote:
>
>>
>> There's also the possibility that making this a sort of community
>>project would motivate people to make and share improvements on the
>>most promising samples. ("perfect, if only it did XYZ...")
>>
>> So I wasn't imagining that people would whip up a stylesheet just
>>for the competition, but that they would take something they
>>already have and document and/or polish it for sharing purposes.
>
>If I wear my open source hat, I don't think this is very efficient
>way to proceed. If we end up with 10 stylesheets
>by 10 different people, written in 10 different coding styles,
>covering 10 different areas of the TEI,
>with 10 different copyright notices, what then? How do you compare
>them? Who are the judges?
>It would be much better for people to join in a single community
>project and contribute according to their ability,
>I think.
>
>I stress the issue of licensing. If a stylesheet written by A N
>Other is posted on the TEI web site,
>it needs an open source license to be of practical uses to other
>projects. Better, the copyright would
>be donated to the TEI, so that we can guard the IPR for future generations.
>
>Since I didn't take part in the conversation, I find it hard to
>understand what people were thinking
>they really wanted here. The minutes say "Council discussed the
>problem of SR's style-sheets and the dichotomy
>that they serve both as an example and what the TEI itself uses". I
>suggest that this dichotomy
>is entirely illusory: the stylesheets are NOT intended as an example
>of TEI XSLT programming at all,
>but as a serious contribution for real use. The idea of them as an
>"example" is a piece of mischievous whimsy
>spread by Michael Beddow; they are _not_ written as a master class
>in obscure XSLT to challenge
>future generations! The dichotomy is between their twin parentage of
>what I provide and maintain
>for my local department, and what I wrote with NSF funding for the
>TEI. Possibly in retrospect it was a bad
>idea to make the stylesheets for the TEIC depend on the ones for Oxford.
>
>It seems to me that there are two very different problems here:
>
>a) we need more examples of TEI-processing software for people to
>study and get ideas from.
> we definitely want to encourage people to show their work. I
>personally dislike the idea of a
> competition, but its a possible way to proceed.
>
>b) we (the TEIC) own the copyright[1] of all the XSLT code which I
>maintain on Sourceforge, and
> we need it for our internal work (viz, producing the Guidelines);
>but those stylesheets are not
> well-documented, and their parameterized interface is fairly
>off-putting as a result. We need to
> decide whether the TEI really wants this sorted out, and take a
>more positive fatherhood role over its
> bastard child, or whether to leave them as is as internal tools
>which the editorial process uses.
> I don't think you solve problem b) with the solution to problem a).
>So which do we care about more?
>
>Just to clear up a misunderstanding, by the way, the stylesheet
>releases on the TEI Web site
>are the last version which I wanted to release publicly. I have not
>neglected this, it is
>intentional. I am currently in the throes of making the stylesheets
>do the right thing
>with xml:id and @target, so they are in a mess right now.
>
>[1] its rather important that this be the case, as otherwise I'd
>have problems with IPR at Oxford. long
>story.
>
>--
>Sebastian Rahtz
>Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services
>13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
>
>OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service
>http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 16:52:39 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 17:00:04 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:00:04 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41AB9BE4.2010703@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:00:04 +0000

Julia Flanders wrote:
> Sebastian, you're right, one stipulation would need to be that the
> donor of any stylesheet gives permission for general use in some
> standard way specified by the TEI. I assume we have such an
> arrangement where applicable for any TEI tool or stylesheet currently
> made available via our site, and that we would continue to do so.
In fact, we don't have such an arrangement. we really should do so.
>
> The point of the contest was not primarily to make a big deal of
> adjudicating among the contestants, but to provide a bit of fun to
> motivate people to contribute
well, anything's worth trying!
>
> Concerning your last point--although the TEI stylesheets, as you say,
> are designed for internal use, the fact that they're distributed with
> OxyGen has given them an unintended status.
They weren't designed for internal use, though. They were designed to be
used for real
>
> Anyway--it sounds as if this is one vote against the competition but
> in favor of soliciting donated stylesheets...?
ure, I have no problem soliciting more stuff to link to from the web
site. I do have a problem asking for stuff to be
_delivered_ from the TEI web site, as it involves the IPR and
maintenance issues.
I don't mind competitions _per se_.
But as I say, it doesn't address something which I think is a bigger
problem.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 17:06:23 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Nov 29 18:36:06 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:36:06 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Hosting a TEI council meeting In-Reply-To: <41AB4EE4.1000005@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:36:06 +0900

Sebastian Rahtz oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> I will almost certainly be unable to get to the council meeting in May,
> wherever it is held, as I expect to be in East Timor in April and May.
>
We haven't fixed the date yet, although Syd suggested end of April /
early May. When would be a date suitable to your schedule?
Also, I assume having a Council meeting after the META tei-classes
meeting would be desirable, so the scheduling for that meeting should
also be done pretty soon.

All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 18:36:40 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 18:45:46 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:45:46 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Hosting a TEI council meeting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41ABB4AA.2090005@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:45:46 +0000

Christian Wittern wrote:
>
>We haven't fixed the date yet, although Syd suggested end of April /
>early May. When would be a date suitable to your schedule?
>
>
>
I expect to be away all of April and May, and the first half of June.
Rule me out of discussions, really. This is going to wreck
my year in a big way, I suspect :-}
>Also, I assume having a Council meeting after the META tei-classes
>meeting would be desirable, so the scheduling for that meeting should
>also be done pretty soon.
>
>
yes, indeed. we need to have that meeting in late January, I guess

-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 18:53:14 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Nov 29 21:10:07 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 21:10:07 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] report, very late, from PB WG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <16811.54911.87396.391909@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 21:10:07 -0500

> I have just received email from Terry Catapano indicating that a
> brief summary of progress to date on the PB workgroup may be found at:
> http://www.columbia.edu/~thc4/tei-pb/summary.html
This has now been moved to the PB part of the TEI website:
http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/PB/pbr01.xml
http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/PB/pbr01.html
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 21:18:24 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Tue Nov 30 12:23:22 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:23:22 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: <41AB75AA.4070806@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16812.44170.115789.651448@cushing.cis.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:23:22 -0500

> Under Finalize draft of MS:
> "but concern was expressed that there has been no response to some of
> the detailed comments that have been made."
> -> Council agreed that once the draft was publicized, comments on it
> should receive rapid attention from the MS taskforce.
Done.

> "Councilors" (passim) -> "Council members" (for consistency)
Done.

> "suggested that Councilors should look at items in the
> order they personally prefer"
> -> "suggesting that Council members should feel free to look at and
> comment on any items in which they were personally interested"
Done.

> "available on the web" (add xref to
> www.tei-c.org/Members/2004-Baltimore/ maybe?)
Eh. Seemed like a bad idea at the time, but sure.

> I would delete: "SB thought there
> was a reason for some, if not all, of these apparent
> discrepancies, but could not recall them. "
OK. It was in there mostly to help hedge our bets (for which it isn't
really needed) and to try to remind me to research this and post
about it ASAR after we get P5 on SF.

> -> xpointer schemes, concerning which discussion was deferred. (till
> when? should probly be an action point
Wording changed. But no 'when' was decided, and no actions were
proposed, let alone accepted. In fact, even the word "deferred" is a
bit strong -- Sebastian merely pointed out we didn't have to discuss
the scheme part now to agree to the rest, so I made the presumption
that Council was only agreeing to the rest. I'm not sure it was
completely explicit.

> I think describing Sebastian's stylesheets as a "problem" is pretty
> cheeky but that's not relevant.
Yes it is (relevant). Badly worded on my part; reworded to avoid the
implication that the stylesheets are the problem. (Thanks, Julia!)

> yes the source forge version is the only one which is currently
> being maintained, and so any residual ones on the website should
> certainly be tidied up. Likewise e.g. tei-emacs
Thanks for the clarification.

> I thought the point was not to have more broader discussion but to
> decide on whether or not the proposal is acceptable as it stands?
That may have been the idea you expressed before departing, but it's
not what was eventually decided.

> Andreas Nolde and Bruce d'Arblay chiefly, I think. Isn't it in
> the discussion log, which you (I thought) were a member of?
What discussion log? Trembley refers only to "the group" in his
postings. I have a vauge recollection of reference to xml-biblio
(another SF project), but I haven't been following it.

Updated version should be out in a few minutes.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Nov 30 2004 - 12:24:05 EST
From alex.bia at ua.es Wed Dec 1 22:00:23 2004 From: alex.bia at ua.es (Alejandro Bia) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:00:23 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Update on my whereabouts and apologies for missing last conf-call Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041202032643.03cf8b60@mussol.umh.es>

From: Alejandro Bia
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:00:23 +0100

Dear TEI-C members:
A recent email by Christian Wittern reminded me I have news to tell, though
I never find the time to write them down.
Recently I've changed my affiliation. Now I'm a full time lecturer at
another local university, but I still keep my links with the library as an
honorary consultant. My new working conditions are better (higher salary,
more time for research, better future possibilities, and last but not
least: more freedom), but I still have my heart at the Cervantes D.L.
I currently spend half of the week at the new university, and the other
half at the old one, since I'm still involved in long term research
projects at U. Alicante, and belong to a research group there. At a point I
will have to be more selective and reduce or eliminate some activities.
Time will tell.
The new university (Miguel Hern?ndez University), has four campuses spread
along the province of Alicante. It is really new (8 years old), and there
is more potential for growth there. Now I'm teaching software engineering,
and next semester project management and web environment design (all are
topics I like and enjoy to teach).
I regret to have missed the conf-call of last Monday. I was traveling to
Madrid where I gave a talk on good practices and recommendations for
starting digitization projects at the National Library. People is
increasingly getting interested in digitization and web publishing there. I
tried to enthused them with Spanish flavored TEI and teiPublisher.
The pace is hectic, but I'm quite happy...
Best,
Alex.-

---------------------------------------------------------
ALEJANDRO BIA-PLATAS
e-mail: abia_at_umh.es
Departamento de Estad?stica y Matem?tica Aplicada
Universidad Miguel Hern?ndez
Edificio Torretamarit
Avenida de la Universidad s/n, E-03202, Elche, ESPA?A
http://www.umh.es/
Tel: +34 966658542
Fax: +34 966658715
Tel?fono m?vil: +34 610806427
---------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Wed Dec 01 2004 - 22:00:41 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Wed Dec 1 22:54:15 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd_Bauman_at_brown.edu) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:54:15 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Update on my whereabouts and apologies for missing last conf-call In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20041202032643.03cf8b60@mussol.umh.es> Message-ID: <16814.37351.855738.436357@emt.wwp.brown.edu>

From:
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:54:15 -0500

Congratulations, Alejandro. Best of luck in your new position. As for
us, we can only hope that your new position permits you the time and
energy to continue to contribute to TEI, and that, should the chance
for a TEI meeting in Alicante arise, the new university is half as
hospitable as the old. :-)
Best to you and Mar.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Wed Dec 01 2004 - 22:54:55 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Dec 2 18:54:52 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:54:52 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:54:52 +0900

Dear Council members,
As promised, here is the draft of my reply to John Smith and the
Sanskrit taskforce. Any comments welcome.
============================================================
Dear John,
At its recent telephone conference, the TEI Council discussed the
proposal you submitted on behalf of the Sanskrit taskforce and I would
like to inform you now of the results.
The TEI Council welcomed the submission and would like to thank you
and your collaborators for your work at enhancing the TEI
applicability to Sanskrit and other languages that require complex
analytical encoding.
The TEI Council agreed that the proposed form could be used to encode
this forms for data interchange and that it should be used in the next
version of the Guidelines to illustrate the use the intended
linguistic analysis, as well as the use of within .
The ensuing discussion centered around how the constraints on the use
of attribute values, that are implicit or in the text of your proposal
could be formalized using a schema language. Several possibilities
were proposed, but none of them could be immediately agreed on. As it
turned out, validation in a very rigid form for a case like this will
require the TEI to review the procedures within the overall framework
of the TEI.
The last issue, which basically means that no immediate, automatic
validation through a xml parser is available, should be a minor
concern to your group, I think, since the software you are developping
will act as some kind of special-purpose-validator, as its function
will depend on the correct application of the markup. If that does
not sound feasible, a Schematron rule could be used to validate the
markup.
While the validation procedure is still pending, the TEI Council
thinks the markup as suggested is useful and appropriate and would
like to encourage you to implement it as it stands.

All the best,
Christian Wittern
Chair, TEI Technical Council

============================================================

-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Thu Dec 02 2004 - 18:55:09 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Dec 2 19:07:06 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 09:07:06 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: <16812.44170.115789.651448@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 09:07:06 +0900

Dear Syd and Council members,
The minutes of our call on Monday look fine to me, thank you Syd for
making them available so quickly and accurately.
As noted in the minutes, our next call is scheduled for Jan 31, 2005
1300 UTC. I hope that all who are Council members on that date will
verify their availability and speak up *now* if there is a need to
reschedule. I know that sudden changes might always occur, but would
like to make sure that no oversight keeps Council members from
participating due to commitments that are known today.
Also, I would like to proceed with the planning for next year,
especially the Council meeting as soon as possible. Sebastian said he
is not available from early April to mid June. I think it would be
desirable to have a meeting scheduled so that he can participate, so I
would like to reopen the issue of timing of the meeting. Is there
anything that speaks against a meeting in the second half of June?
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Thu Dec 02 2004 - 19:07:24 EST
From sschreib at umd.edu Thu Dec 2 23:28:38 2004 From: sschreib at umd.edu (Susan Schreibman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 23:28:38 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1102048118.802efc00sschreib@umd.edu>

From: Susan Schreibman
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 23:28:38 -0500

Hi Christian
The ACH/ALLC is 15-18 June in Victoria, Canada, and several of us will be there, as well as teaching in a summer school the week before. I will also have to stay on a few days for other project work. So if it is very late June, that should be ok for me at least.
usan

-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Wittern zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
To: Syd_Bauman_at_brown.edu
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 09:07:06 +0900
Subject: Re: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call

Dear Syd and Council members,
The minutes of our call on Monday look fine to me, thank you Syd for
making them available so quickly and accurately.
As noted in the minutes, our next call is scheduled for Jan 31, 2005
1300 UTC. I hope that all who are Council members on that date will
verify their availability and speak up *now* if there is a need to
reschedule. I know that sudden changes might always occur, but would
like to make sure that no oversight keeps Council members from
participating due to commitments that are known today.
Also, I would like to proceed with the planning for next year,
especially the Council meeting as soon as possible. Sebastian said he
is not available from early April to mid June. I think it would be
desirable to have a meeting scheduled so that he can participate, so I
would like to reopen the issue of timing of the meeting. Is there
anything that speaks against a meeting in the second half of June?
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Thu Dec 02 2004 - 23:37:51 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Fri Dec 3 07:21:35 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd_Bauman_at_brown.edu) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 07:21:35 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A25285.7040101@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16816.23119.510137.207475@emt.wwp.brown.edu>

From:
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 07:21:35 -0500

> >Either way. But if we do the "close for a week" method, we need to
> >take a "snapshot" before we start messing around, to make backing
> >out easy if something goes wrong.
> I'l think you find we use a version control system which looks after
> this for us :-}
That's exactly what I meant ... to use Perforce's 'label' feature.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Fri Dec 03 2004 - 07:22:19 EST
From pwillett at umich.edu Fri Dec 3 08:01:06 2004 From: pwillett at umich.edu (Perry Willett) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:01:06 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c4d938$2a14d1e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA>

From: Perry Willett
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:01:06 -0500

The American Library Assn has its annual convention in Chicago on June
24-28. I have to attend (whether I want to or not).
Perry Willett
University of Michigan
pwillett_at_umich.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: tei-council-bounces_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
[mailto:tei-council-bounces_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU] On Behalf Of
Christian Wittern
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 7:07 PM
To: Syd_Bauman_at_brown.edu
Cc: TEI Council
Subject: Re: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call

Dear Syd and Council members,
The minutes of our call on Monday look fine to me, thank you Syd for
making them available so quickly and accurately.
As noted in the minutes, our next call is scheduled for Jan 31, 2005
1300 UTC. I hope that all who are Council members on that date will
verify their availability and speak up *now* if there is a need to
reschedule. I know that sudden changes might always occur, but would
like to make sure that no oversight keeps Council members from
participating due to commitments that are known today.
Also, I would like to proceed with the planning for next year,
especially the Council meeting as soon as possible. Sebastian said he
is not available from early April to mid June. I think it would be
desirable to have a meeting scheduled so that he can participate, so I
would like to reopen the issue of timing of the meeting. Is there
anything that speaks against a meeting in the second half of June?
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Fri Dec 03 2004 - 08:07:18 EST
From jawalsh at indiana.edu Fri Dec 3 09:32:43 2004 From: jawalsh at indiana.edu (John A. Walsh) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:32:43 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: <000001c4d938$2a14d1e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> Message-ID: <31A1DE8E-4538-11D9-B79E-000D9334E716@indiana.edu>

From: John A. Walsh
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:32:43 -0500

And June 15-18 is the annual ACH/ALLC conference in Victoria, BC,
Canada.
John
| John A. Walsh, Associate Director for Projects and Services
| Digital Library Program / Indiana University Libraries
| Indiana University, 1320 East Tenth Street, Bloomington, IN 47405
| Voice:812-855-8758 Fax:812-856-2062 edu>
On Dec 3, 2004, at 8:01 AM, Perry Willett wrote:
> The American Library Assn has its annual convention in Chicago on June
> 24-28. I have to attend (whether I want to or not).
>
> Perry Willett
> University of Michigan
> pwillett_at_umich.edu
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tei-council-bounces_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> [mailto:tei-council-bounces_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU] On Behalf Of
> Christian Wittern
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 7:07 PM
> To: Syd_Bauman_at_brown.edu
> Cc: TEI Council
> Subject: Re: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call
>
>
> Dear Syd and Council members,
>
> The minutes of our call on Monday look fine to me, thank you Syd for
> making them available so quickly and accurately.
>
> As noted in the minutes, our next call is scheduled for Jan 31, 2005
> 1300 UTC. I hope that all who are Council members on that date will
> verify their availability and speak up *now* if there is a need to
> reschedule. I know that sudden changes might always occur, but would
> like to make sure that no oversight keeps Council members from
> participating due to commitments that are known today.
>
> Also, I would like to proceed with the planning for next year,
> especially the Council meeting as soon as possible. Sebastian said he
> is not available from early April to mid June. I think it would be
> desirable to have a meeting scheduled so that he can participate, so I
> would like to reopen the issue of timing of the meeting. Is there
> anything that speaks against a meeting in the second half of June?
>
> All the best,
>
> Christian
>
> --
>
> Christian Wittern
> Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
> 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Fri Dec 03 2004 - 09:32:59 EST
From sschreib at umd.edu Sat Dec 4 12:31:15 2004 From: sschreib at umd.edu (Susan Schreibman) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 12:31:15 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] next Council meeting Message-ID: <005501c4da27$0ef47ce0$6500a8c0@susandelllapt>

From: Susan Schreibman
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 12:31:15 -0500

hi all --
I can also host the Council meeting here. We would have to work around
graduation dates and sporting events, but there is a nice room in the
library we can use to hold the meeting.
There are three airports in the area, Regan National and BWI are the
nearest. Regan is often the most inexpensive to fly into, but it is a long
trip to UMD.
Hotels vary widely. The Inn and Conference Centre on campus is the nicest
hotel around, but it is between $139-159 per room per night. There is a
Quality Inn within walking distance which is considerably cheaper, but not
as nice, $79-119 per night. For those who came in for the Migration Work
Group, that was the hotel we used.
There are many great restaurants in the DC area, but none are within walking
distance. For the Migration Group we had several cars, so we were able to
drive to decent restaurants for dinner. This time, I'm not sure if anybody
would have a car besides me, so we might have to rent a car. Another option
would be to go downtown by metro.
Susan
____________________________
Dr Susan Schreibman
Assistant Director
Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities (MITH)
McKeldin Library
University of Maryland, College Park, 20742
Phone: 301 405 8505
Fax: 301 314 7111
Email: sschreib_at_umd.edu
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sat Dec 04 2004 - 12:31:33 EST
From James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Dec 5 11:29:43 2004 From: James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (James Cummings) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 16:29:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [tei-council] next Council meeting (fwd) In-Reply-To: <[tei-council] next Council meeting (fwd)> Message-ID:

From: James Cummings
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 16:29:43 +0000 (GMT)

And this time posting from the correct address...
-James
--- Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 22:22:35 +0000 (GMT) From: James Cummings ox.ac.uk> To: tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU Subject: Re: [tei-council] next Council meeting I promised to provide a similar list of hotels for Oxford. Sorry for the delay in doing so, I'm currently in Uppsala Sweden where I've just taught two full days of a Digital Literature course (with me talking about XPath, XQuery, XSLT, the CURSUS project as a case study, and a heavily plagiarised presentation on "Whither TEI"). The benefits of hosting the council meeting in Oxford is that Lou, Sebastian and I wouldn't have to travel anywhere. (Though, to be honest, I like going to strange new places...) As with everywhere else, the prices for hotels variehttp://www.oxfordcity.co.uk/index.htmls widely, as I'm sure does the quality of service. All prices are in British Pounds and for a range from the most modest single they provide to an ensuite double. I've taken the prices from their websites and not confirmed them. All are within walking distance of OUCS (especially the historic and prestigious Old Parsonage which is immediately next door). Never having stayed at any of them I know nothing of their general quality. (Perhaps the other Oxford residents may have some opinions on them.) ---- The Old Parsonage 125-190 http://www.oldparsonage-hotel.co.uk/ The Old Bank Hotel 150-240 http://www.oldbank-hotel.co.uk/ The Burlington Hotel 40-85 http://www.burlington-house.co.uk/ The Galaxie Hotel 50-90 http://www.galaxie.co.uk/ The Parklands Hotel 50-84 http://www.oxfordcity.co.uk/hotels/parklands/ ---- Other attractions of Oxford include the University buildings themselves, numerous museums, pubs, and restaurants. See http://www.oxfordcity.co.uk/index.html Oxford is 70 mins (by coach) from Heathrow airport and about an hour on the train from London Paddington railway station. -James --- Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Dec 05 2004 - 11:31:11 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Dec 5 11:30:44 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:30:44 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] next Council meeting (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41B337B4.3020501@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:30:44 +0000

To follow up on James' posting, we could host an actual meeting in Oxford in
the Computing Services (basic, but free, and completely computerized);
or (better) shift the whole shebang to Rewley House, where the meeting
was held 2 years ago. They have better meeting rooms than the one
we had before, and laid-on coffee/tea/lunch to a decent standard.
whether it is appropriate to wait until June just to accomodate
me, I have my doubts. Apart from anything else, I doubt
if I'll return in a useable state :-}
ebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Dec 05 2004 - 11:42:23 EST
From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Dec 5 12:56:42 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:56:42 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] next Council meeting (fwd) In-Reply-To: <41B337B4.3020501@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41B34BDA.2010105@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:56:42 +0000

If we are reasonably confident about dates and numbers, it might also be
possible to get accomodation in one or other of the colleges. Some of
them are quite nice, others are merely picturesque...
The last time the Council met here I think no-one had any problem making
their own accomodation arrangements. The RTS will have an "events
officer" in post early next year who could be asked to help if necessary.
We can't guarantee to lay on slugs for dinner this time though...

The previous meeting held here
Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> To follow up on James' posting, we could host an actual meeting in
> Oxford in
> the Computing Services (basic, but free, and completely computerized);
> or (better) shift the whole shebang to Rewley House, where the meeting
> was held 2 years ago. They have better meeting rooms than the one
> we had before, and laid-on coffee/tea/lunch to a decent standard.
>
> whether it is appropriate to wait until June just to accomodate
> me, I have my doubts. Apart from anything else, I doubt
> if I'll return in a useable state :-}
>
> sebastian
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>

_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sun Dec 05 2004 - 12:51:54 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Tue Dec 7 19:50:16 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 09:50:16 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith In-Reply-To: Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 09:50:16 +0900

Dear Council members,
everal days have passed without a comment on this draft, so I assume
it is endorsed and will send it to John as is.
All the best,
Christian
Christian Wittern zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp> writes:
> Dear Council members,
>
> As promised, here is the draft of my reply to John Smith and the
> Sanskrit taskforce. Any comments welcome.
>
> ============================================================
> Dear John,
>
> At its recent telephone conference, the TEI Council discussed the
> proposal you submitted on behalf of the Sanskrit taskforce and I would
> like to inform you now of the results.
>
> The TEI Council welcomed the submission and would like to thank you
> and your collaborators for your work at enhancing the TEI
> applicability to Sanskrit and other languages that require complex
> analytical encoding.
>
> The TEI Council agreed that the proposed form could be used to encode
> this forms for data interchange and that it should be used in the next
> version of the Guidelines to illustrate the use the intended
> linguistic analysis, as well as the use of within .
>
> The ensuing discussion centered around how the constraints on the use
> of attribute values, that are implicit or in the text of your proposal
> could be formalized using a schema language. Several possibilities
> were proposed, but none of them could be immediately agreed on. As it
> turned out, validation in a very rigid form for a case like this will
> require the TEI to review the procedures within the overall framework
> of the TEI.
>
> The last issue, which basically means that no immediate, automatic
> validation through a xml parser is available, should be a minor
> concern to your group, I think, since the software you are developping
> will act as some kind of special-purpose-validator, as its function
> will depend on the correct application of the markup. If that does
> not sound feasible, a Schematron rule could be used to validate the
> markup.
>
> While the validation procedure is still pending, the TEI Council
> thinks the markup as suggested is useful and appropriate and would
> like to encourage you to implement it as it stands.
>
>
> All the best,
>
> Christian Wittern
>
> Chair, TEI Technical Council
>
>
> ============================================================
>
>
> --
>
> Christian Wittern
> Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
> 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Tue Dec 07 2004 - 19:50:41 EST
From sschreib at umd.edu Tue Dec 7 23:53:44 2004 From: sschreib at umd.edu (Susan Schreibman) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 20:53:44 -0800 Subject: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001701c4dce1$eb8523a0$6700a8c0@umduwmy7d8ux3d>

From: Susan Schreibman
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 20:53:44 -0800

it sounds like a very fair summary Christian
usan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Wittern" zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
To: "Christian Wittern" zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
Cc: village.Virginia.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 4:50 PM
Subject: Re: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith

>
> Dear Council members,
>
> several days have passed without a comment on this draft, so I assume
> it is endorsed and will send it to John as is.
>
> All the best,
>
> Christian
>
> Christian Wittern zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp> writes:
>
> > Dear Council members,
> >
> > As promised, here is the draft of my reply to John Smith and the
> > Sanskrit taskforce. Any comments welcome.
> >
> > ============================================================
> > Dear John,
> >
> > At its recent telephone conference, the TEI Council discussed the
> > proposal you submitted on behalf of the Sanskrit taskforce and I would
> > like to inform you now of the results.
> >
> > The TEI Council welcomed the submission and would like to thank you
> > and your collaborators for your work at enhancing the TEI
> > applicability to Sanskrit and other languages that require complex
> > analytical encoding.
> >
> > The TEI Council agreed that the proposed form could be used to encode
> > this forms for data interchange and that it should be used in the next
> > version of the Guidelines to illustrate the use the intended
> > linguistic analysis, as well as the use of within .
> >
> > The ensuing discussion centered around how the constraints on the use
> > of attribute values, that are implicit or in the text of your proposal
> > could be formalized using a schema language. Several possibilities
> > were proposed, but none of them could be immediately agreed on. As it
> > turned out, validation in a very rigid form for a case like this will
> > require the TEI to review the procedures within the overall framework
> > of the TEI.
> >
> > The last issue, which basically means that no immediate, automatic
> > validation through a xml parser is available, should be a minor
> > concern to your group, I think, since the software you are developping
> > will act as some kind of special-purpose-validator, as its function
> > will depend on the correct application of the markup. If that does
> > not sound feasible, a Schematron rule could be used to validate the
> > markup.
> >
> > While the validation procedure is still pending, the TEI Council
> > thinks the markup as suggested is useful and appropriate and would
> > like to encourage you to implement it as it stands.
> >
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > Christian Wittern
> >
> > Chair, TEI Technical Council
> >
> >
> > ============================================================
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Christian Wittern
> > Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
> > 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN
> > _______________________________________________
> > tei-council mailing list
> > tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
> --
>
> Christian Wittern
> Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
> 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Dec 07 2004 - 20:56:21 EST
From nsmith at email.unc.edu Tue Dec 7 21:44:57 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 21:44:57 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003701c4dccf$e85b8730$6501a8c0@lib.unc.edu>

From: Natasha Smith
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 21:44:57 -0500

Christian:
It's a good thorough summary. And sorry for the delay with replying.
best, ns
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Wittern" zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
To: "Christian Wittern" zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
Cc: village.Virginia.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith

>
> Dear Council members,
>
> several days have passed without a comment on this draft, so I assume
> it is endorsed and will send it to John as is.
>
> All the best,
>
> Christian
>
> Christian Wittern zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp> writes:
>
> > Dear Council members,
> >
> > As promised, here is the draft of my reply to John Smith and the
> > Sanskrit taskforce. Any comments welcome.
> >
> > ============================================================
> > Dear John,
> >
> > At its recent telephone conference, the TEI Council discussed the
> > proposal you submitted on behalf of the Sanskrit taskforce and I would
> > like to inform you now of the results.
> >
> > The TEI Council welcomed the submission and would like to thank you
> > and your collaborators for your work at enhancing the TEI
> > applicability to Sanskrit and other languages that require complex
> > analytical encoding.
> >
> > The TEI Council agreed that the proposed form could be used to encode
> > this forms for data interchange and that it should be used in the next
> > version of the Guidelines to illustrate the use the intended
> > linguistic analysis, as well as the use of within .
> >
> > The ensuing discussion centered around how the constraints on the use
> > of attribute values, that are implicit or in the text of your proposal
> > could be formalized using a schema language. Several possibilities
> > were proposed, but none of them could be immediately agreed on. As it
> > turned out, validation in a very rigid form for a case like this will
> > require the TEI to review the procedures within the overall framework
> > of the TEI.
> >
> > The last issue, which basically means that no immediate, automatic
> > validation through a xml parser is available, should be a minor
> > concern to your group, I think, since the software you are developping
> > will act as some kind of special-purpose-validator, as its function
> > will depend on the correct application of the markup. If that does
> > not sound feasible, a Schematron rule could be used to validate the
> > markup.
> >
> > While the validation procedure is still pending, the TEI Council
> > thinks the markup as suggested is useful and appropriate and would
> > like to encourage you to implement it as it stands.
> >
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > Christian Wittern
> >
> > Chair, TEI Technical Council
> >
> >
> > ============================================================
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Christian Wittern
> > Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
> > 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN
> > _______________________________________________
> > tei-council mailing list
> > tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
> --
>
> Christian Wittern
> Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
> 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Dec 07 2004 - 21:45:09 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Wed Dec 8 10:36:31 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 15:36:31 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] licensing of XSLT stylesheets Message-ID: <41B71F7F.7030001@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 15:36:31 +0000

As most of you will have seen on TEI-L, Syntext don't want to distribute
the XSLT stylesheets I wrote for the Consortium, because they are GPLed.
Would the Board politically, and the Council technically, like to
tell me to change the license for the next edition of this XSL stuff?
In order to protect me from Oxford's rules and regulations,
Lou and I have been claiming for some time that the time I spend
on the XSLT is working for the TEI, so the consortium holds
the copyright.
Choices are
1. leave as is, and attempt to educate Syntext about the implications
of the GPL
2. create a separate licensing arrangement with Syntext
3. release the next edition under a very liberal BSD-like license
my inclination is to 1, but I don't want to put off our fledgling
relationship
with such people, so 3 may the easiest way out.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Wed Dec 08 2004 - 11:34:28 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Dec 8 21:49:42 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:49:42 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] licensing of XSLT stylesheets In-Reply-To: <41B71F7F.7030001@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:49:42 +0900

Sebastian Rahtz oxford.ac.uk> writes:
> Choices are
>
> 1. leave as is, and attempt to educate Syntext about the implications
> of the GPL
> 2. create a separate licensing arrangement with Syntext
> 3. release the next edition under a very liberal BSD-like license
>
> my inclination is to 1, but I don't want to put off our fledgling
> relationship
> with such people, so 3 may the easiest way out.
This is not a Council issue, so just my personal view. (1) would be
the best long term solution and should at least be tried. It seems
that the understanding of GPL implications is not thorough yet in this
case. Also, the requirement to bundle the source code is a
non-brainer for XSL:-)

Christian

-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Wed Dec 08 2004 - 21:49:56 EST
From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Thu Dec 9 07:31:06 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 13:31:06 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] request Message-ID: <41B8458A.80904@kantl.be>

From: Edward Vanhoutte
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 13:31:06 +0100

Dear Fellow Council Members,
In May 2004, the Council gathered in the building of the Royal Academy
of Dutch Language and Literature and enjoyed the Academy's amicability
and hospitability. I believe we held a successful meeting in the
beautiful historical setting of the Academy building.
The Flemish Minister of culture now has launched the idea to sell the
building of the Royal Academy and relocate the Academy out of its
building. The minister is in urgent need of some money and thinks this
could be the solution.
We protest fiercely against the planned sale of the building and
relocation of the Academy which would undoubtedly influence the research
currently undertaken at the Academy, i.e. inside the Centre for
Scholarly Editing and Document Studies (CTB). The Permanent Secretary of
the Academy would like to ask for your support which you can articulate
in three ways:
1. You can back up the stance of the Royal Academy
, by sending
your details (title, name, function, affiliation and address) to
reactieverkoop_at_kantl.be. Or print out the viewpoint, add your title,
name, function, affiliation and address, sign it and send it to the
Royal Academy at KANTL, Koningstraat 18, b-9000 Gent, Belgium. In either
way, your name will be added to the list of people who protest against
the plans of the minister of culture at:
.
2. You can send or mail a letter of protest to the current Minister
of Culture in which you e.g. emphasize the cultural and scholarly role
of the Royal Academy, its library, archive and its research centre
(Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies). You can contact the
Minister of Culture at:
Bert Anciaux
Flemish Minister of Culture, Youth, Sports and Brussels
Chrysalisgebouw - Wetstraat 34-36
b-1040 BRUSSEL
Belgium
kabinet.anciaux_at_vlaanderen.be
Please make sure you send a copy of your letter to
reactieverkoop_at_kantl.be or to:
Prof. dr. Georges De Schutter
Permanent Secretary
Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature
Koningstraat 18
b-9000 Gent
Belgium
3. You can send a letter of support to the Permanent Secretary of
the Royal Academy wherein you back up the Academy's protest against the
plans for sale of the building and relocation of the Academy, and in
which you emphasize the importance of the Royal Academy's cultural and
scholarly work in an international context. Please send your letters of
support/protest, if possible on headed (institutional) notepaper, to:
Prof. dr. Georges De Schutter
Permanent Secretary
Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature
Koningstraat 18
b-9000 Gent
Belgium
Of course you could also mail your letter, addressed to the
Permanent Secretary, to reactieverkoop_at_kantl.be, although letters on
paper are prefered for this matter.
We would be much obliged if you could consider this request.
Sincerely yours,
Edward Vanhoutte
on behalf of the
Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature
-- ---------------- Weg met het plan voor de verkoop van het Academiegebouw en de verhuizing van de Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde. Teken de petitie op No to the sale of the building of the Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature and the planned relocation of the Academy. Sign the petition on ================ Edward Vanhoutte Coordinator Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies Associate Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 edward dot vanhoutte at kantl dot be http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Thu Dec 09 2004 - 07:29:00 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Fri Dec 10 13:21:21 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:21:21 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] targe#foo Message-ID: <41B9E921.70401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:21:21 +0000

In looking to implement @target, I am worried by things like target="FOO"/>
which we currently have. Is that @target to be interpreted as #FOO now?
ie are all uses of the target attribute to be interpreted as URIs?
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Fri Dec 10 2004 - 13:25:28 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Fri Dec 10 14:43:27 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:43:27 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] targe#foo In-Reply-To: <41B9E921.70401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16825.64607.948665.723915@emt.wwp.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:43:27 -0500

> ie are all uses of the target attribute to be interpreted as URIs?
Not just all uses of target=, but all uses of any attribute that in
P4 was declared as IDREF (or IDREFS).
Here's a hastily extracted list that I created for Lou shortly after
the Members' Meeting; it might not be completely correct, but gives
you an idea.
resp= of
target= of
hand= of
resp= of
hand= of
resp= of
to= of
targets= of
from= of
to= of
from= of
to= of
scheme= of
target= of
target= of
target= of
target= of
ana= of class.analysis
decls= of class.declaring
location= of class.dictionaries
mergedin= of class.dictionaries
resp= of class.edit
target= of class.formPointers
lang= of class.global
inst= of class.interpret
copyOf= of class.linking
corresp= of class.linking
exclude= of class.linking
next= of class.linking
prev= of class.linking
sameAs= of class.linking
select= of class.linking
synch= of class.linking
domains= of class.pointerGroup
hand= of class.readings
depPtr= of class.terminology
grpPtr= of class.terminology
end= of class.timed
start= of class.timed
scheme= of
hand= of
resp= of
target= of
hand= of
resp= of
hand= of
resp= of
to= of
value= of
value= of
who= of
resp= of
fVal= of
feats= of
hand= of
resp= of
target= of
new= of
old= of
resp= of
children= of
follow= of
parent= of
value= of
targets= of
scheme= of
who= of
follow= of
parent= of
value= of
targets= of
target= of
perf= of
who= of
adj= of
adjFrom= of
adjTo= of
value= of
target= of
targetEnd= of
code= of
scheme= of
target= of
who= of
target= of
target= of
active= of
passive= of
target= of
hand= of
resp= of
children= of
value= of
who= of
who= of
code= of
scheme= of
who= of
from= of
to= of
hand= of
target= of
target= of
render= of
perf= of
origin= of
value= of
who= of
hand= of
who= of
since= of
target= of
script= of
who= of
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Fri Dec 10 2004 - 14:44:23 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Fri Dec 10 15:22:19 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:22:19 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] targe#foo In-Reply-To: <16825.64607.948665.723915@emt.wwp.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41BA057B.7080509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:22:19 +0000

Syd Bauman wrote:
>Not just all uses of target=, but all uses of any attribute that in
>P4 was declared as IDREF (or IDREFS).
>
>
>
yikes. you've just depressed me. more work than I had realized.
I hate this stupid HTML system of "foo" matching "#foo", so that you always
have to strip off the first character of things.
oh well.
-- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Fri Dec 10 2004 - 15:26:26 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Fri Dec 17 21:07:31 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:07:31 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:07:31 +0900

Dear Council members,
Scheduling of meetings is notoriously difficult, but I will give it
another try. I will list up the options that have been surfacing so
far and hope that a show of hands somehow narrows them down.
1) Time
Sebastian is unavailable April to mid-June. If we want to
work around this, it could be either before or after:
* End of March
* Second half of June
Otherwise, we could stary with our usual timing of mid-of-May (with
a bit of flexibility, end of April has also been suggested.

2) Place
We have I think heard three offers, Oxford, Copenhagen and
Maryland.
If we take the late June option, I would propose hold it in
conjunction with ACH/ALLC, preferable after the conference.

Personally, I would not want to miss either Sebastian nor ACH/ALLC, so
the last option would be most convenient for me, but that is just one
vote.
So I would now like to formally ask all members of the Council for
next year to express their preferences.
All the best,
Christian

-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Fri Dec 17 2004 - 21:07:41 EST
From pwillett at umich.edu Sat Dec 18 12:59:33 2004 From: pwillett at umich.edu (Perry Willett) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 12:59:33 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000301c4e52b$575af630$922bd38d@CLUBSODA>

From: Perry Willett
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 12:59:33 -0500

I also offered to host the next TEI Council meeting in Ann Arbor.
Perry Willett
University of Michigan
pwillett_at_umich.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: tei-council-bounces_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
[mailto:tei-council-bounces_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU] On Behalf Of
Christian Wittern
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 9:08 PM
To: tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting

Dear Council members,
Scheduling of meetings is notoriously difficult, but I will give it
another try. I will list up the options that have been surfacing so
far and hope that a show of hands somehow narrows them down.
1) Time
Sebastian is unavailable April to mid-June. If we want to
work around this, it could be either before or after:
* End of March
* Second half of June
Otherwise, we could stary with our usual timing of mid-of-May (with
a bit of flexibility, end of April has also been suggested.

2) Place
We have I think heard three offers, Oxford, Copenhagen and
Maryland.
If we take the late June option, I would propose hold it in
conjunction with ACH/ALLC, preferable after the conference.

Personally, I would not want to miss either Sebastian nor ACH/ALLC, so
the last option would be most convenient for me, but that is just one
vote.
So I would now like to formally ask all members of the Council for
next year to express their preferences.
All the best,
Christian

-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sat Dec 18 2004 - 12:59:51 EST
From James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sat Dec 18 13:06:12 2004 From: James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (James Cummings) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:06:12 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: Message-ID:

From: James Cummings
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:06:12 +0000 (GMT)

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Christian Wittern wrote:
> If we take the late June option, I would propose hold it in
> conjunction with ACH/ALLC, preferable after the conference.
>
> Personally, I would not want to miss either Sebastian nor ACH/ALLC, so
> the last option would be most convenient for me, but that is just one
> vote.
I like this idea, could I ask how many members of the Council were
intending already to go to ACH/ALLC? I've submitted a paper proposal,
but like others won't discover whether this has been accepted until
7 Feb. 2005.
> So I would now like to formally ask all members of the Council for
> next year to express their preferences.
My preferences would be in the order of ACH/ALLC, Copenhagen, Oxford.
-James
--- Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sat Dec 18 2004 - 13:06:33 EST
From sschreib at umd.edu Sat Dec 18 21:14:52 2004 From: sschreib at umd.edu (Susan Schreibman) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:14:52 -0800 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000901c4e570$8c3073e0$0301a8c0@umduwmy7d8ux3d>

From: Susan Schreibman
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:14:52 -0800

John, Alex, and myself are all part of the teiPublisher team, and we are
planning on having our first face to face meeting after the ACH-ALLC (we are
working on a $0 budget, and it is the first time all of us will be in the
same place at the same time). We can't meet before the conference as Amit
and myself are teaching on the summer school.
We'll also need a day to a day and a half for the teiPublisher meeting,
which won't start until Sunday, or perhaps Monday. And I'm sure Alex and
myself would prefer to not have any meetings Saturday afternoon as we'll
both be working through the summer school and the conference.
If we can manage to have both meetings after ACH/ALLC, that would be fine
with me. If not, perhaps Oxford in March or early July.
Susan

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Cummings" oxford.ac.uk>
To: "Christian Wittern" zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
Cc: village.Virginia.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: [tei-council] Next Council meeting

> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Christian Wittern wrote:
>
> > If we take the late June option, I would propose hold it in
> > conjunction with ACH/ALLC, preferable after the conference.
> >
> > Personally, I would not want to miss either Sebastian nor ACH/ALLC, so
> > the last option would be most convenient for me, but that is just one
> > vote.
>
> I like this idea, could I ask how many members of the Council were
> intending already to go to ACH/ALLC? I've submitted a paper proposal,
> but like others won't discover whether this has been accepted until
> 7 Feb. 2005.
>
> > So I would now like to formally ask all members of the Council for
> > next year to express their preferences.
>
> My preferences would be in the order of ACH/ALLC, Copenhagen, Oxford.
>
> -James
>
> ---
> Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford
> James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Sat Dec 18 2004 - 18:16:53 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Dec 19 18:18:00 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:18:00 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <000901c4e570$8c3073e0$0301a8c0@umduwmy7d8ux3d> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:18:00 +0900

"Susan Schreibman" edu> writes:
> John, Alex, and myself are all part of the teiPublisher team, and we are
> planning on having our first face to face meeting after the ACH-ALLC (we are
> working on a $0 budget, and it is the first time all of us will be in the
> same place at the same time). We can't meet before the conference as Amit
> and myself are teaching on the summer school.
>
> We'll also need a day to a day and a half for the teiPublisher meeting,
> which won't start until Sunday, or perhaps Monday. And I'm sure Alex and
> myself would prefer to not have any meetings Saturday afternoon as we'll
> both be working through the summer school and the conference.
>
> If we can manage to have both meetings after ACH/ALLC, that would be fine
> with me. If not, perhaps Oxford in March or early July.
>
It still looks to me like post-ACH/ALLC would be the most viable
option; and I hope the teiPublisher meeting is not a show stopper.
How many people are involved in that meeting? Could you possible wait
until Tuesday so that we can have the Council meeting Sunday/Monday.
I admit that is quite a tight scheduling and I personally would not
mind hold the TEI Council meeting off for two days until Tuesday, but
I am afraid there are many busy people on the Council...
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Sun Dec 19 2004 - 18:18:19 EST
From Julia_Flanders at brown.edu Mon Dec 20 09:54:00 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at brown.edu (Flanders, Julia) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 09:54:00 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <[tei-council] Next Council meeting> Message-ID: <1A97D3D73A03FC419D87967D3CE4760C0286C0C0@MAIL1.AD.Brown.Edu>

From: Flanders, Julia
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 09:54:00 -0500

I'll be teaching at the summer institute before ACH/ALLC, so having a meeting after the conference would stretch things out quite a bit. I guess I'd be willing if that's everyone's preferred option (and it would save the TEI some travel money). I have to be in the UK in early July for a conference, so the Oxford/early July option would be convenient for me. Other than that, I don't have any strong preferences.
Julia

-----Original Message-----
From: tei-council-bounces_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU on behalf of Christian Wittern
Sent: Sun 12/19/04 18:18
To: Susan Schreibman
Cc: tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
Subject: Re: [tei-council] Next Council meeting

"Susan Schreibman" edu> writes:
> John, Alex, and myself are all part of the teiPublisher team, and we are
> planning on having our first face to face meeting after the ACH-ALLC (we are
> working on a $0 budget, and it is the first time all of us will be in the
> same place at the same time). We can't meet before the conference as Amit
> and myself are teaching on the summer school.
>
> We'll also need a day to a day and a half for the teiPublisher meeting,
> which won't start until Sunday, or perhaps Monday. And I'm sure Alex and
> myself would prefer to not have any meetings Saturday afternoon as we'll
> both be working through the summer school and the conference.
>
> If we can manage to have both meetings after ACH/ALLC, that would be fine
> with me. If not, perhaps Oxford in March or early July.
>
It still looks to me like post-ACH/ALLC would be the most viable
option; and I hope the teiPublisher meeting is not a show stopper.
How many people are involved in that meeting? Could you possible wait
until Tuesday so that we can have the Council meeting Sunday/Monday.
I admit that is quite a tight scheduling and I personally would not
mind hold the TEI Council meeting off for two days until Tuesday, but
I am afraid there are many busy people on the Council...
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Dec 20 2004 - 09:59:11 EST
From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Dec 20 09:59:44 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:59:44 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <41C6E8E0.4030006@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:59:44 +0000

FWIW, I would not normally attend ACH/ALLC.
I don't think you should change the dates for one person, however
well-dressed, suave and amusing that person may be; so I'd still suggest
you stick with April.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Dec 20 2004 - 10:04:30 EST
From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Dec 20 11:18:01 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:18:01 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <41C6E8E0.4030006@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>

From: Lou Burnard
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:18:01 +0000

My experience has always been that scheduling meetings back to back, in
particular in tandem with a major conference, is utterly exhausting and
thus unprofitable. On those grounds alone I don't think having the
Council meeting tagged on to ACHALLC would be such a smart move, with or
without the dapper presence of my esteemed colleague.
I also think that we have a lot of work to report to the council already
and there should be plenty more by April. So my vote (not that I have
one) is for April. If people are tired of Oxford or wary of Copenhagen,
I believe Nancy is also nice in the spring, and not at all expensive.

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> FWIW, I would not normally attend ACH/ALLC.
>
> I don't think you should change the dates for one person, however
> well-dressed, suave and amusing that person may be; so I'd still suggest
> you stick with April.
>
> Sebastian
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Dec 20 2004 - 11:20:18 EST
From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Mon Dec 20 11:43:06 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:43:06 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41C7011A.1030404@kantl.be>

From: Edward Vanhoutte
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:43:06 +0100

I agree with Lou on this one.
Edward
Lou Burnard wrote:
> My experience has always been that scheduling meetings back to back, in
> particular in tandem with a major conference, is utterly exhausting and
> thus unprofitable. On those grounds alone I don't think having the
> Council meeting tagged on to ACHALLC would be such a smart move, with or
> without the dapper presence of my esteemed colleague.
>
> I also think that we have a lot of work to report to the council already
> and there should be plenty more by April. So my vote (not that I have
> one) is for April. If people are tired of Oxford or wary of Copenhagen,
> I believe Nancy is also nice in the spring, and not at all expensive.
>
>
>
> Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>
>> FWIW, I would not normally attend ACH/ALLC.
>>
>> I don't think you should change the dates for one person, however
>> well-dressed, suave and amusing that person may be; so I'd still
>> suggest you stick with April.
>>
>> Sebastian
>> _______________________________________________
>> tei-council mailing list
>> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
-- ---------------- Weg met het plan voor de verkoop van het Academiegebouw en de verhuizing van de Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde. Teken de petitie op No to the sale of the building of the Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature and the planned relocation of the Academy. Sign the petition on ================ Edward Vanhoutte Coordinator Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies Associate Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 edward dot vanhoutte at kantl dot be http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Dec 20 2004 - 11:40:46 EST
From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Dec 20 13:49:08 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:49:08 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <41C7011A.1030404@kantl.be> Message-ID: <16839.7844.477534.803100@emt.wwp.brown.edu>

From: Syd Bauman
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:49:08 -0500

> I agree with Lou on this one.
As do I.
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Dec 20 2004 - 13:49:54 EST
From nsmith at email.unc.edu Mon Dec 20 17:34:28 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:34:28 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <41C7011A.1030404@kantl.be> Message-ID: <01c001c4e6e4$116e74c0$6501a8c0@lib.unc.edu>

From: Natasha Smith
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:34:28 -0500

after looking at my calendar and thinking about all pros and cons, I say:
1. I will be at ach and will be able to stay after it for two more days.
2. I can meet in April (would like to know more specifically)
3. I think Sebastian's presence would be VERY needed, however....
4. I am not sure that the "business" can wait until end of June-July - we
have too many unsolved issues and too many pressing deadlines
5. re: meeting place. I am open to all suggestions (Oxford, Nancy, Ann
Arbor, Baltimore, did I miss anything else?), but I think we should look
closer to the economics, i.e. travel $$$, more specifically tickets.
best, ns
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward Vanhoutte" be>
To: "Lou Burnard" oxford.ac.uk>
Cc: village.Virginia.EDU>
Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [tei-council] Next Council meeting

> I agree with Lou on this one.
>
> Edward
>
> Lou Burnard wrote:
>
> > My experience has always been that scheduling meetings back to back, in
> > particular in tandem with a major conference, is utterly exhausting and
> > thus unprofitable. On those grounds alone I don't think having the
> > Council meeting tagged on to ACHALLC would be such a smart move, with or
> > without the dapper presence of my esteemed colleague.
> >
> > I also think that we have a lot of work to report to the council already
> > and there should be plenty more by April. So my vote (not that I have
> > one) is for April. If people are tired of Oxford or wary of Copenhagen,
> > I believe Nancy is also nice in the spring, and not at all expensive.
> >
> >
> >
> > Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> >
> >> FWIW, I would not normally attend ACH/ALLC.
> >>
> >> I don't think you should change the dates for one person, however
> >> well-dressed, suave and amusing that person may be; so I'd still
> >> suggest you stick with April.
> >>
> >> Sebastian
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> tei-council mailing list
> >> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> >> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > tei-council mailing list
> > tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
> >
>
> --
>
> ----------------
> Weg met het plan voor de verkoop van het Academiegebouw en de verhuizing
> van de Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde. Teken
> de petitie op
>
> No to the sale of the building of the Royal Academy of Dutch Language
> and Literature and the planned relocation of the Academy. Sign the
> petition on
>
> ================
> Edward Vanhoutte
> Coordinator
> Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL)
> Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies
> Associate Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing
> Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde
> Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature
> Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium
> tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49
> edward dot vanhoutte at kantl dot be
> http://www.kantl.be/ctb/
> http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/
> http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Mon Dec 20 2004 - 17:49:17 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Dec 20 20:31:08 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:31:08 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <01c001c4e6e4$116e74c0$6501a8c0@lib.unc.edu> Message-ID:

From: Christian Wittern
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:31:08 +0900

Dear Council members,
Most voices raised so far are more or less against a meeting in
conjunction with ACH/ALLC, which is fine with me, so we drop that
option.
May I then suggest that we look at a meeting in March or April?
As to the meeting place and economic considerations (travel and
lodging for council members), I looks to me like Oxford would be the
likely winner, with Nancy and Copenhagen run-ups -- at least my
experience so far has been that hotels in the States tend to be more
expensive then in Europe, on top of that the total travel costs would
likely be less.
On the other hand, we have held all Council meetings so far in Europe
(London, Oxford, Ghent) and for our colleagues from the States, Ann
Arbor or Maryland would certainly be more convenient. Given the fact
that all members do their work voluntarily, such non-economic
considerations should also play a role.
I wonder if somebody (Syd?) could give us some hard figures to ponder
in addition to this? As to ticket cost, for me a trip to Europe would
be about US $200 less than a trip to the east cost of the US.
All the best,
Christian
-- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council Received on Mon Dec 20 2004 - 20:31:18 EST
From Laurent.Romary at loria.fr Tue Dec 21 03:28:04 2004 From: Laurent.Romary at loria.fr (Laurent Romary) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:28:04 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <3C11BB36-532A-11D9-92F6-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr>

From: Laurent Romary
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:28:04 +0100

Le 20 d?c. 04, ? 17:18, Lou Burnard a ?crit :
> My experience has always been that scheduling meetings back to back,
> in particular in tandem with a major conference, is utterly exhausting
> and thus unprofitable. On those grounds alone I don't think having the
> Council meeting tagged on to ACHALLC would be such a smart move, with
> or without the dapper presence of my esteemed colleague.
>
> I also think that we have a lot of work to report to the council
> already and there should be plenty more by April. So my vote (not that
> I have one) is for April. If people are tired of Oxford or wary of
> Copenhagen, I believe Nancy is also nice in the spring, and not at all
> expensive.
>
As a matter of fact, there is no difficulty in organizing a council
meeting either in Nancy or in Paris (at AFNOR), which may even be more
central (close to CDG airport). But I have no prejudice as to the place
in general.
Best
Laurent
_______________________________________________
tei-council mailing list
tei-council_at_lists.village.Virginia.EDU
http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
Received on Tue Dec 21 2004 - 03:28:19 EST
From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Aug 26 02:45:13 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 26 Aug 2004 15:45:13 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] [John Smith ] End of word Message-ID: From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Aug 26 03:27:43 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 08:27:43 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] [John Smith ] End of word In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <412D90EF.9060007@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Christian Wittern wrote: >Dear Council members, > >I found the following in my inbox > I cannot see anything attached sebastian From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Aug 26 04:47:21 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 26 Aug 2004 17:47:21 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] [John Smith ] End of word In-Reply-To: <200408260830.i7Q8URe8011805@relay.hostbasket.com> References: <200408260830.i7Q8URe8011805@relay.hostbasket.com> Message-ID: Edward Vanhoutte writes: > neither can I > > Edward > > Sebastian Rahtz wrote : > > > I cannot see anything attached Strange things happens in this summer heat. Trying again, this time with good old cut&paste: From: John Smith Subject: End of word To: Christian Wittern cc: Raymond Doctor , John Smith Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 13:03:58 +0100 (BST) Dear Christian, I am writing to ask for your advice, and possibly your help. The Sanskrit workgroup has been running for many months now, but I have no sense that we are making any progress. It has so far happened twice that the group have agreed on a particular approach which I have written up and submitted to the Council, and that the Council has then found problems with it and suggested significant changes. In the telephone discussion at the beginning of June, Lou Burnard was the chief speaker (apart from myself); on that occasion he suggested replacing my and tags with a solution based on the existing tag ; also came up again. Since then I have made an attempt to discuss these points with him directly: I wrote to him pointing out that the definition of is too narrow to permit the various kinds of language-specific markup that we would need, but he has lapsed into silence. I find this very frustrating. There are Council members on the workgroup, and it would make much more sense if they raised their objections to the approaches we are developing in the workgroup's own discussions, rather than conducting a parallel debate elsewhere. As things stand, it appears that we are having an endlessly prolonged and inconclusive debate. Do you think there is anything that can be done to improve matters? As I have said before, Raymond Doctor and I have a piece of software to write. To be more precise, the development of this software is currently stalled while the developers await the details of the XML markup that it will use. We came to the TEI because we wanted that markup to be "standard", but we both now feel that unless the discussion can be brought to a conclusion fairly soon, it will be better for us to pull out and go ahead with a "home-made" solution. Do you think you can help us avoid this undesirable outcome? Best wishes, John Smith -- Dr J. D. Smith * john.smith at oriental.cam.ac.uk Faculty of Oriental Studies * http://bombay.oriental.cam.ac.uk Sidgwick Avenue * Tel. 01223 335140 Cambridge CB3 9DA * Fax 01223 335110 -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Aug 26 08:43:40 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:43:40 +0100 (BST) Subject: [tei-council] [John Smith ] End of word In-Reply-To: References: <200408260830.i7Q8URe8011805@relay.hostbasket.com> Message-ID: <20040826124340.25A2022647@webmail219.herald.ox.ac.uk> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/pipermail/tei-council/attachments/20040826/da49c977/attachment.ksh From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Aug 26 12:16:14 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 17:16:14 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] [John Smith ] End of word In-Reply-To: References: <200408260830.i7Q8URe8011805@relay.hostbasket.com> Message-ID: <412E0CCE.4030302@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Christian Wittern wrote: > We came to the TEI because we wanted that >markup to be "standard", but we both now feel that unless the >discussion can be brought to a conclusion fairly soon, it will be >better for us to pull out and go ahead with a "home-made" solution. Do >you think you can help us avoid this undesirable outcome? > > The "home-made" solution will always be worse. He needs to write up his proposal, taking into account Lou's concerns and suggestions. What's so hard about that? I am puzzled by his aggrieved tone. Sebastian From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Aug 26 19:27:46 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 27 Aug 2004 08:27:46 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] [John Smith ] End of word In-Reply-To: <20040826124340.25A2022647@webmail219.herald.ox.ac.uk> References: <200408260830.i7Q8URe8011805@relay.hostbasket.com> <20040826124340.25A2022647@webmail219.herald.ox.ac.uk> Message-ID: Lou Burnard writes: > > > I find this very frustrating. There are Council members on the > > workgroup, and it would make much more sense if they raised their > > objections to the approaches we are developing in the workgroup's own > > discussions, rather than conducting a parallel debate elsewhere. > > I agree that it would be very good to see the debate carried on properly, > whether it is on the workgroups private list, on the TEI sourceforge site or > elsewhere. I have not seen any debate as such though: John produced a proposal, > which the Council commented on at its last meeting. I haven't seen any public > attempt to address the concerns since then. I see his complaints being more about the loops between the WG and the Council. He asked for comments on the WG list before he presented his stuff to the Council. It would have been more helpful to have the discussion at that time. Anyway, what happened to the idea of merging the Sanskrit discussion with the advocates? Where is that issue discussed now? > I have had private conversations > with both John (as I mentioned above) and also with Felix Sasaki, but those are > not the same as public debate, which I entirely agree is lacking on this as on > many other matters which the CXouncil needs to discuss. We need to have a list of these issues and a timetable. Did you flesh out these a little more? > As > > things stand, it appears that we are having an endlessly prolonged > > and inconclusive debate. > > > > Do you think there is anything that can be done to improve matters? As > > I have said before, Raymond Doctor and I have a piece of software to > > write. To be more precise, the development of this software is > > currently stalled while the developers await the details of the XML > > markup that it will use. We came to the TEI because we wanted that > > markup to be "standard", but we both now feel that unless the > > discussion can be brought to a conclusion fairly soon, it will be > > better for us to pull out and go ahead with a "home-made" solution. Do > > you think you can help us avoid this undesirable outcome? This is the main question I think. It would be bad news for TEI if they just walk away and do this on their own, especially since we seem that close now. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sat Aug 28 11:12:07 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou-at-home) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:12:07 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Report from Paris Message-ID: <4130A0C7.30208@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> The joint ISO/TEI workgroup on feature structure representation met in Paris this week. The current draft for ISO 26410 was worked through in some detail with ISO experts and a large number of stylistic and clarificatory modifications proposed. Part 5 of the current draft, which corresponds with chapter FS of the TEI P5 draft, is more or less untouched, except that a foolish error was detected which needs to be corrected. Minutes of the meeting (taken by one of the ISO reps) detail the other changes, and are now available from http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/FS/fsm02.html, which also includes the proposed timetable for concluding the document and sending it out for national ballot as a DIS -- hopefully to be done within the next month or so. A gang of four (Kiyong, Harry, Eric, and I) meeting in the corridor after the formal end of procedures also decided that the scheme would be improved no end by just a few renamings. So, at the next iteration, I propose to make the following changes: - will be renamed and its LABEL attribute will become NAME; - and will lose their TYPE attribute and should use the N attribute to name themselves for now. - will be renamed or possibly Otherwise, I think we all felt it was time to declare victory and move on to consider feature system declarations, which (or some equivalent) will constitute part 2 of the proposed DIS. It is hoped to set up a similar joint TEI/ISO workgroup to address this topic, under a different chair, but with several of the same participants. More on that later. From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Wed Sep 1 16:06:52 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 21:06:52 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion Message-ID: <41362BDC.2060404@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> At our next phone call, scheduled for 20 Sept, it would be very helpful if council members could give some initial comments on the various suggestions for enhancements which have so far been accumulating on sourceforge. I was going to attempt a summary of them all, and can easily produce a list if so required, but discussion will be much more productive if council members have already read at least some of the arguments before hand. The easiest way of doing this is for you to point your browser at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=644065&group_id=106328&func=browse (or navigate to the "feature requests" from http://tei.sourceforge.net) If you want to add comments on any item (or add new items) before the meeting, that would also be much appreciated! I am also working on a document (http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/edw83.xml) which attempts to summarize all other "work in progress" for P5. This is far from complete, but I hope to get it into better shape in good time for the phone call. All input gratefully received! Lou From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Sep 13 03:58:05 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 13 Sep 2004 16:58:05 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Council telephone conference on Sep. 20 Message-ID: Dear Council members, Our next telephone conversation is scheduled for next Monday 1300 UTC; exactly one week from today. I would like to collect items for the agenda now. If you think we need to discuss something, please contact me, or just send it to the council list. Documents etc. should be ready well before the weekend, so that all of us do have time to study them. All the best, Christian Wittern -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 13 12:02:29 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 17:02:29 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Council telephone conference on Sep. 20 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4145C495.8000704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> As I indicated in a posting to this list last week, the most useful thing for council members to do (from the editors' point of view) would be to take a look at the various suggestions for change which have been made, and which are freely available from the TEI's source forge site. As I envisage it, the Council is the chief agency for finally deciding what goes into the technical make up of the Guidelines. It is the authority for the decisions which humble editors have to implement. It cannot do that job unless it has at least some opinions on the various suggestions which the editors have to address! We have promised to present the members meeting with a list of agreed enhancements for P5. I don't see that being based on anything but the editors' vague feelings of what might work unless we get some input from the Council really soon. Lou Christian Wittern wrote: > Dear Council members, > > Our next telephone conversation is scheduled for next Monday 1300 UTC; > exactly one week from today. I would like to collect items for the > agenda now. If you think we need to discuss something, please contact > me, or just send it to the council list. Documents etc. should be > ready well before the weekend, so that all of us do have time to study > them. > > All the best, > > Christian Wittern > From Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu Mon Sep 13 16:25:00 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 16:25:00 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion In-Reply-To: <41362BDC.2060404@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41362BDC.2060404@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Apologies for a lengthy and tardy post. I've looked through all of the suggestions. The ones that Syd posted I won't comment on, except to say I support them all (having been involved in their evolution). If anyone has questions of the "why on earth" variety about these, I can probably provide specifics. On the others, several seem like very good ideas: --publisher children/requiring explicit relation between publisher and pubPlace --Hilde Boe's suggestions on manuscript encoding, and the realRhyme= attribute; I can't judge the usefulness of the an= and realAn= attributes. --improve handling of letters: this seems like a high priority to me. Could we give Nick and Edward an official commission to come up with a proposal? --names/prosopography module: this seems like a good idea. I'd also like to propose that and be designated for use not just in describing speakers in a linguistic corpus, but also more generally any participant in the document's creation/production/etc. In other words, if I want to document demographic info on a set of authors, editors, translators, even printers and publishers, this would be a logical place to do it. --adding namespace info to : the goal is clearly important. I like the element as a wrapper around elements, not least because we could also provide therein a place to provide info about that namespace. I think we could even require this element (rather than allowing it to be optional and assuming TEI namespace in its absence); this will be the least of people's conversion challenges when they go to P5. As an alternative, wouldn't a namespace= attribute on do the trick? Are there significant advantages to grouping all the elements from a given namespace within a wrapper? As an addendum: I would suggest that we drop the requirement that there be a element for every GI; the useful functions of these days seem to me to be rendition and documentation; verification of the number of elements seems a little old-fashioned. --revision of : seems good to me, but I'm not sure I understand the proposal exactly--is the element intended to appear both within (which would have the content model of current element) and also as a direct child of ? Also: the current content model of figure doesn't allow for the fact that text (including poetry) may appear both/either above and below the graphical content of the figure. It would be good to be able to accommodate this fact. It's also good to preserve the current distinction between the text that accompanies the figure (headings, captions, etc.) and text that is actually embedded within the image content (e.g. speech ballons, painter signatures, banners, signs, etc.). Some seem like interesting ideas that aren't fully perfect, or aren't urgent: --Andrea Nolda's thoughts on inline, displayed, and floating elements: I sympathize with the goals of this one, but I'm not sure it's a good thing for TEI to specify default rendering behavior. This seems like something that should be handled by allowing authors to set renditional defaults, and this is already possible in TEI with . For the rest, I disagree with him, I think things like what to do with the value of n= *should* be left to the stylesheet, and the author is free to create such a stylesheet if he/she wants to constrain the appearance of the document. --the accept= attribute on , , and : it seems to me that if the symbols are to stand just as symbols, they should just be encoded as renditional facts. If the problem is that there's no consensus about the symbols to be used and their interpretation, perhaps the better thing would be to bypass the symbols and allow the accept= attribute to have a set of specific values (more nuanced, by the looks of things, than "yes | no") which represent a superset of the values/interpretations currently in use, allowing the user to employ a subset as appropriate. Then the symbols could just be rendered with a stylesheet. I don't think having an accept= attribute with values "* | ? | ?* | (?) | #" etc. is such a great idea. But this isn't an area I'm familiar with, so I'm going on logic, not experience. --type= on ; I'm susceptible to this because I believe type= is so generally useful. It doesn't seem overwhelmingly urgent to me, or likely to affect a lot of users, but I can see the utility. --revision of ; this seems confused to me. If the element is intended to mark the point in the flow of text where the index entry points, this doesn't seem like a good place to put information about how the index entry itself is going to look (e.g. "see also" references, etc.). Surely the point is that some software comes along and gathers up all the elements and processes them into an index entry. No single point can be expected to carry the extra information for the entry itself. I think the problem is real--this extra information is needed--but packing it into doesn't seem like a good approach. I also don't see the function of the element; is its content intended to become part of the index entry, or is it just the basis for a link? --add / to etc.: seems reasonable to want to have content/markup in a label --make non-empty to allow for values with internal markup: seems reasonable. --add to the typed class to allow for subtype=: I agree with the basic idea here, but I wonder whether a unit= attribute would be better than subtype=; it would more explicitly capture the semantics of what John Walsh seems to be after. I also wonder (while we're on this) whether it would be better to have the number as a separate attribute, rather than including it as part of the reg= attribute. --generic element in header: I'm on the fence about this. I guess it's the equivalent of providing and and ; why shouldn't there also be a generic metadata element in the header? But I also feel as if we should be attempting to provide for all the reasonable classes of metadata in a more specific way. In other words, this shouldn't become the dustbin where we put metadata ideas that don't fit into the existing TEI header. The prospects for interchange with this generic element seem pretty poor. Possibly unnecessary? --Hilda Boe's suggestion for extending metrical analysis of verse: doesn't the realMet= attribute duplicate the functionality of the existing real= attribute? Best, Julia >At our next phone call, scheduled for 20 Sept, it would be very >helpful if council members could give some initial comments on the >various suggestions for enhancements which have so far been >accumulating on sourceforge. I was going to attempt a summary of >them all, and can easily produce a list if so required, but >discussion will be much more productive if council members have >already read at least some of the arguments before hand. > >The easiest way of doing this is for you to point your browser at >http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=644065&group_id=106328&func=browse > >(or navigate to the "feature requests" from http://tei.sourceforge.net) > >If you want to add comments on any item (or add new items) before >the meeting, that would also be much appreciated! > >I am also working on a document >(http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/edw83.xml) which attempts to summarize >all other "work in progress" for P5. This is far from complete, but >I hope to get it into better shape in good time for the phone call. >All input gratefully received! > >Lou > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >tei-council mailing list >tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU >http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 13 17:17:00 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:17:00 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion In-Reply-To: References: <41362BDC.2060404@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41460E4C.2070102@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Julia Flanders wrote: > Apologies for a lengthy and tardy post. I've looked through all of the > suggestions. Many thanks for these! I will post a few specific comments in response to some of them, just for the sake of clarity. To aid comprehension I will respond as separate notes though (at some point it would be useful to integrate them into the SourceForge record too -- do you mind if I do that? L From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 13 17:24:23 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:24:23 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion: nameSpace/tagUsage In-Reply-To: References: <41362BDC.2060404@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41461007.4040007@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Julia Flanders wrote: > --adding namespace info to : the goal is clearly important. I > like the element as a wrapper around elements, > not least because we could also provide therein a place to provide info > about that namespace. I think we could even require this element (rather > than allowing it to be optional and assuming TEI namespace in its > absence); this will be the least of people's conversion challenges when > they go to P5. As an alternative, wouldn't a namespace= attribute on > do the trick? Are there significant advantages to grouping > all the elements from a given namespace within a wrapper? A namespace has to be supplied as a fairly long string: a namespace attribute on every tagUsage element would be quite a high overhead imho. As an > addendum: I would suggest that we drop the requirement that there be a > element for every GI; the useful functions of > these days seem to me to be rendition and documentation; verification of > the number of elements seems a little old-fashioned. I fear I don't agree here. Documentation of tagUsage should include information about frequency of deployment: that's what it's for. It's not just for verification -- if I am doing a quick trawl through a digital library to find texts containing elements, I really want to reliably know which texts have got oodles of them and which haven't. I think that recommended rendition info should be in a separate element. It confuses the issue to lump it together with tagUsage and seems unwontedly normative aspect in this context. Also, separating it out would enable you to document different rendition policies for the same element. Lou From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 13 17:30:12 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:30:12 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion: figure and figdesc In-Reply-To: References: <41362BDC.2060404@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41461164.9000508@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Julia Flanders wrote: > --revision of : seems good to me, but I'm not sure I understand > the proposal exactly--is the element intended to appear both > within (which would have the content model of current > element) and also as a direct child of ? Also: the current > content model of figure doesn't allow for the fact that text (including > poetry) may appear both/either above and below the graphical content of > the figure. It would be good to be able to accommodate this fact. It's > also good to preserve the current distinction between the text that > accompanies the figure (headings, captions, etc.) and text that is > actually embedded within the image content (e.g. speech ballons, painter > signatures, banners, signs, etc.). > Apologies for lack of clarity. should NOT contain but be a sibling of it. The idea is that figure should contain heading information, figDesc, figText, a element of some kind, and possibly a nested figure. Making figText repeatable around is certainly a possibility, and one I hadn't thought of, though the details may be a little complicated to interpret. Maybe the REND attribute of should be used to specify whereabouts the text is located in the image in question. From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 13 17:32:28 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:32:28 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion In-Reply-To: References: <41362BDC.2060404@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <414611EC.1000608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Julia Flanders wrote: -revision of ; this seems confused to me. If the element is intended to mark the point in the flow of text where the index entry points, this doesn't seem like a good place to put information about how the index entry itself is going to look (e.g. "see also" references, etc.). Surely the point is that some software comes along and gathers up all the elements and processes them into an index entry. No single point can be expected to carry the extra information for the entry itself. I think the problem is real--this extra information is needed--but packing it into doesn't seem like a good approach. I also don't see the function of the element; is its content intended to become part of the index entry, or is it just the basis for a link? I share Julia's misgivings on this one. I also wonder whether we shouldn't be thinking a bit harder about how to integrate topic maps with the TEI (John Walsh gave a very good paper on this at DRH, by the way) instead of trying to soup up to do something similar. From Julia_Flanders at Brown.Edu Mon Sep 13 21:37:52 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.Edu (Flanders, Julia) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:37:52 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion Message-ID: <1A97D3D73A03FC419D87967D3CE4760C4BC875@MAIL1.AD.Brown.Edu> I'm happy to have them integrated into the SourceForge record--in fact I should have done that myself. Many thanks... Best, Julia -----Original Message----- From: Lou Burnard [mailto:lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk] Sent: Mon 9/13/04 17:17 To: Flanders, Julia Cc: tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU Subject: Re: [tei-council] Topics for discussion Julia Flanders wrote: > Apologies for a lengthy and tardy post. I've looked through all of the > suggestions. Many thanks for these! I will post a few specific comments in response to some of them, just for the sake of clarity. To aid comprehension I will respond as separate notes though (at some point it would be useful to integrate them into the SourceForge record too -- do you mind if I do that? L From Julia_Flanders at Brown.Edu Mon Sep 13 21:39:37 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.Edu (Flanders, Julia) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:39:37 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Topics for discussion: nameSpace/tagUsage Message-ID: <1A97D3D73A03FC419D87967D3CE4760C4BC876@MAIL1.AD.Brown.Edu> Fair enough.... I didn't think about seeking sample texts with elements but I can see the utility. (Though wouldn't other methods of searching prove more reliable? It's possible to be wrong or out of date in , whereas a grep search would tell the truth for sure.) I have no objection to separating the renditional aspect, and agree about the unwanted/confusing normativeness of the current arrangement. Best, Julia As an > addendum: I would suggest that we drop the requirement that there be a > element for every GI; the useful functions of > these days seem to me to be rendition and documentation; verification of > the number of elements seems a little old-fashioned. I fear I don't agree here. Documentation of tagUsage should include information about frequency of deployment: that's what it's for. It's not just for verification -- if I am doing a quick trawl through a digital library to find texts containing elements, I really want to reliably know which texts have got oodles of them and which haven't. I think that recommended rendition info should be in a separate element. It confuses the issue to lump it together with tagUsage and seems unwontedly normative aspect in this context. Also, separating it out would enable you to document different rendition policies for the same element. Lou From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Sep 15 02:59:27 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 15 Sep 2004 15:59:27 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Layout of P5 on the file system Message-ID: Dear Council members, One of the issues I am pondering occasionally is how to improve the thorny issue of dealing with the physical files of the TEI Guidelines, its various Schemas, Stylesheets entities etc. I hope that we can find a layout of the TEI subtree on the file system, which makes it easier to understand, use and maintain. In this context, I would like to recommend to the Councils attention a document by the Debian XML team, which details the layout of the XML subsystem in Debian GNU/Linux[1] and might serve as a good starting point for defining our own policy. If council members would agree to this, I would like to propose to similarily document the structure somewhere in the Guidelines and implement it for P5. Comments? If no objections are raised, I will put this on the agenda for our next call. All the best, Christian [1] http://debian-xml-sgml.alioth.debian.org/xml-policy/index.html -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Wed Sep 15 16:46:36 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 21:46:36 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Layout of P5 on the file system In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4148AA2C.2050602@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> This would rather tie in with my work on making local Debian packages for TEI bits and pieces, in order to build Knoppix CDs. So if the Council agrees that this is a problem, and the Debian spec is the answer, I can proceed with a sample implementation. This would then go across into the TEI Emacs bundle, for instance. It is most definitely the plan to work with Mark Johnson on official TEI Debian packages, so this would again be a good stimulus. Sebastian From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Sep 16 21:01:30 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 17 Sep 2004 10:01:30 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Agenda for TEI Council conference call on Monday, Sep 20th, 2004 at 1300 UTC Message-ID: TEI Council Members and Editors: This is the agenda for the conference call the TEI Council will hold later this coming Monday, Sep 20th, 2004 at 1300 UTC. Please read through the following, in advance of the call. INSTRUCTIONS for conference call: US participants can dial a toll-free number: 1-800-565-9881 Once you're connected, dial 239046# and you should be connected shortly. Participants from outside the US will have to make a long-distance call to the US: +1 416 695 7870 and then follow the same instructions. Expected to participate: Syd Bauman, Alejandro Bia, David Birnbaum, Lou Burnard, Matthew Driscoll, David Durand, Julia Flanders, Sebastian Rahtz, Laurent Romary, Natasha Smith, Susan Schreibman, Edward Vanhoutte, Perry Willett, Christian Wittern. (I hope I got it right this time) Agenda: 9 items ----------------------------------------------------- 1) Review of the minutes from the call of July 2nd, 2004 (15 minutes) Minutes of the meeting are at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm12.html Review of action items, progress. We would also like to review the discussions on TEI-choice and the proposals that might be forming there. The archives for that list are at http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=tei-choice ----------------------------------------------------- 2) Update from David Durand on the Stand-Off Markup Working Group (5 minutes) (Charter at http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/edw74.html, website http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/) ----------------------------------------------------- 3) Report from Laurent Romary on progress of the Feature Structures Working Group. (5 minutes) (Charter at http://www.tei-c.org/FS/tcw01.html, website http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/FS/) ----------------------------------------------------- 4) Update on the Taskforce on Manuscript Description by Matthew Driscoll (5 minutes) (Charge at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcw04.html website http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/MS/) ----------------------------------------------------- 5) Update from Julia Flanders on the Physical Bibliography (PB) Workgroup (5 minutes) (Charge at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcw04.html website http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/PB/) ----------------------------------------------------- 6) Update from Sebastian Rahtz on Metalanguage Workgroup (10 minutes) Charge at: http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcw02.html, website http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/META/ P5 Status ----------------------------------------------------- 7) Review of proposals on SF (20 minutes) Please look and comment on the proposals *in advance to the call* at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=644065&group_id=106328&func=browse 8) Other business (5 minutes) TBA 9) Meetings: (5 minutes) Preparations for Members Meeting. -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Fri Sep 17 12:48:31 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:48:31 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Re: sanskrit examples In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <414B155F.90805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> My apologies for not having done this already. As my earlier note suggested I did try to discuss the solution with John over the phone last month, but I should certainly have completed the action I volunteered for at the last Council call well before now: my bad (as my daughter likes to say). Anyway, to recap on the issue.... John's document proposed two examples (I have not tried to include the accented characters in this email, since they dont really affect the issue) A asidraja asit raja B dharamksetre dharma ksetre In each case, the intention is to show that the first string ("asidraja" or "sharamksetre") can be analysed into two constituents, and that those two constituents need not be simple substrings of the first one. There was (unless I am making it up) a general consensus on the council that mixed content models of this type were less preferable than either of the following more explicit formulations: dharamksetre dharma ksetre dharamksetre dharma ksetre where I have used xxx for some element whose name is to be invented John proposed for example: C dharamksetre dharma ksetre Which seems reasonable enough to me. Using only the existing TEI segmentation and analysis tags, I would suggest D dharamksetre dharma ksetre This representation uses the ID/IDREF link supplied by ANA to point to the analysis, which therefore need not be in the same place in the document. This is advantageous if there are many such cases to be marked up (I have used the arbitrary identifier "C1" but of course a more meaningful id would be preferable, e.g. "dharma-kstre"): the analysis need only be given once in the document. If on the other hand the intention is always to give the two things together, then I see no reason why they should not be grouped using a element: E dharamksetre dharma ksetre At present, the tei-choice group is still arguing about the details of the choice content model, but the above usage is not -- as yet -- in question. "choice" here means simply that there are two possible ways of representing the phenomenon in the text, that the first one given is physically attested in the source, and the other is an appropriate encoding of the same phenomenon. Lou > Dear Lou, > > In the last conference call, you agreed to reencode John Smith's > sanskrit examples using and and send this to him. If you > have these, I would like to have a look. (He is calling me today and > I would like to see what has been going on..) > > All the best, > > Christian > > From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sat Sep 18 17:50:43 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 19 Sep 2004 06:50:43 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Re: sanskrit examples In-Reply-To: <414B155F.90805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <414B155F.90805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Lou Burnard writes: > > > dharamksetre > > > dharma > ksetre > > > > At present, the tei-choice group is still arguing about the details of > the choice content model, but the above usage is not -- as yet -- in > question. "choice" here means simply that there are two possible ways > of representing the phenomenon in the text, that the first one given > is physically attested in the source, and the other is an appropriate > encoding of the same phenomenon. Thank you for sending this along. I agree that this looks like it would be appropriate to discuss this in tei-choice and I think John is preparing to do so. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sun Sep 19 12:58:39 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 12:58:39 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] ** conference call instructions have changed ** Message-ID: <16717.47807.164172.857044@cushing.cis.brown.edu> David is apparently haveing trouble posting. He says: --------- Ingenta has changed their conference calling service to one that reduces the cost to European participants. The new instructions are as follows: Call the conferencing service: US (toll free): 1-866-722 8225 UK (toll-free): 0800 953 1275 Other International callers must call a regular UK number: +44 1452 555 499 Should you want to call the toll number from within the UK, you would dial: (0) 1452 555 499 when you are connected enter a PIN number: 520522# It then asks you to state your name followed by a #. This announces you to the list, and is probably worth doing. --------- From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Sep 19 17:45:01 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 22:45:01 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] report from META for TEI Council call on 20 September Message-ID: <414DFDDD.4050703@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> See http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/META/mew12.html for a status report on the META work. I am sorry you probably won't be seeing it much before the conference call, but there is nothing unexpected or contentious there, I think. Sebastian From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 20 17:48:42 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou-at-home) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 22:48:42 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call Message-ID: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Now available for comment/correction at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html L From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Tue Sep 21 17:27:51 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou-at-home) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:27:51 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Draft updated Message-ID: <41509CD7.1030506@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Following a brief discussion with Matthew this afternoon, I have just updated the draft at http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/MS/FASC-ms.pdf to include in the dtd as well as the discussion text! Matthew has agreed to review this draft and post a brief summary of any further changes necessary before we open up discussion to the wider world (though, as the SF ticket I circulated earlier today indicates, word is already out) onward and upward! Lou From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Fri Sep 24 10:02:29 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:02:29 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: interim SF management proposals] Message-ID: <415428F5.4050803@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Following some discussion between the editors, we would now like to present to the Council the following brief notes on how we propose to handle "feature-requests" appearing on SourceForge. This procedure applies only to feature requests for TEI P5. Similar procedures could be envisaged for other proposals, e.g. for enhancements to software served from the SF site, but we have not yet elaborated the details of those. 1. Every ticket should get at least two comments, one from each editor. Until this happens, a ticket is "open" with whatever priority was originally assigned. 2. If comments have been made by each editor, and there appears to be a consensus as to the correct course of action (tho not necessarily between the two editors!), then the ticket's status will be changed as follows: pending: the ticket proposes a change which should be made at some future date closed: EITHER: the ticket proposes a change which is not going to be made any time soon OR: the ticket proposes a change which has already been made delete: the ticket proposes a change which is so silly it should be forgotten all about 3. When a ticket changes status to "pending", it must also be assigned to one or other of the editors, or to a nominated reviser, for action. [A "reviser" must be registered on SF for this to be feasible] 4. If a ticket has received insuffient comments to move to stage 2 above, or if no consensus emerges as to the correct course of action, then its priority degrades by 1 every month until it gets to the bottom of the pile. Comments gratefully received. A preliminary pass through the whole set of comments has now been carried out. Council members are urged (again) to look at any of the topics listed and contribute their own views. From Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu Fri Sep 24 11:28:16 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:28:16 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: The minutes look fine to me. >Now available for comment/correction at >http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html > >L >_______________________________________________ >tei-council mailing list >tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU >http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Fri Sep 24 11:29:49 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:29:49 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: interim SF management proposals] In-Reply-To: <415428F5.4050803@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <415428F5.4050803@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16724.15725.622715.332995@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > Comments gratefully received. A preliminary pass through the > whole set of comments has now been carried out. Council members > are urged (again) to look at any of the topics listed and > contribute their own views. I would like to reiterate and emphasize Lou's urging that Coucnilors actually read and comment on the feature requests. Pick a half dozen at random, if you like. I also need to admit that I'm not quite done with my initial pass. From Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu Fri Sep 24 11:33:12 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:33:12 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: interim SF management proposals] In-Reply-To: <415428F5.4050803@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <415428F5.4050803@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: This procedure seems like a good one to me. Is there provision (either automated or by hand) for making the proposer aware of the outcome--can the proposer give an email address and receive an automated email message saying "your proposal has been received, thank you very much for your interest, its current status is now X"? or do we at least envision contacting proposers personally when we decide to close or delete their feature request? Will the nominated revisers be chosen ad hoc by the editors, or should we accept volunteers? --Julia >Following some discussion between the editors, we would now like to >present to the Council the following brief notes on how we propose >to handle "feature-requests" appearing on SourceForge. This >procedure applies only to feature requests for TEI P5. Similar >procedures could be envisaged for other proposals, e.g. for >enhancements to software served from the SF site, but we have not >yet elaborated the details of those. > > >1. Every ticket should get at least two comments, one from each editor. >Until this happens, a ticket is "open" with whatever priority was >originally assigned. > >2. If comments have been made by each editor, and there appears to be a >consensus as to the correct course of action (tho not necessarily >between the two editors!), then the ticket's status will be changed as >follows: > > pending: the ticket proposes a change which should be made at some >future date > > closed: > EITHER: the ticket proposes a change which is not going to be >made any time soon > OR: the ticket proposes a change which has already been made > > delete: the ticket proposes a change which is so silly it should be >forgotten all about > >3. When a ticket changes status to "pending", it must also be assigned >to one or other of the editors, or to a nominated reviser, for >action. [A "reviser" must be registered on SF for this to be >feasible] > >4. If a ticket has received insuffient comments to move to stage 2 >above, or if no consensus emerges as to the correct course of action, >then its priority degrades by 1 every month until it gets to the >bottom of the pile. > >Comments gratefully received. A preliminary pass through the whole >set of comments has now been carried out. Council members are urged >(again) to look at any of the topics listed and contribute their own >views. > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >tei-council mailing list >tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU >http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Fri Sep 24 11:43:37 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:43:37 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: interim SF management proposals] In-Reply-To: References: <415428F5.4050803@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16724.16553.911026.1013@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > Is there provision (either automated or by hand) for making the > proposer aware of the outcome The good news is that the original poster, anyone who has contributed, and anyone else who has clicked on the "monitor" button at the top of feautre request page gets automatically notified whenever a change is made, including to its priority. The bad news is that SourceForge sends the *entire* request, including every comment made so far, every time. From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Fri Sep 24 16:54:10 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: 25 Sep 2004 05:54:10 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Lou-at-home writes: > Now available for comment/correction at > http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html Thank you; this was really fast, and my apologies for not looking there immediately. Under item 3, I think we not only discussed co-occurrence constraints, but also the possibility to instantiate certain attributes either as child elements or as attributes in a given schema (that was on the original list of features we wanted for P5). I would like to see this mentioned in the notes, so that we can reference it, if the need arises. Apart from that, the minutes loke fine to me. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sat Sep 25 15:33:05 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:33:05 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Note: in the following I am using "or" to mean "inclusive or" and "or ... but not both" to mean "exclusive or", which is how I was taught English in grade school. > Under item 3, I think we not only discussed co-occurrence > constraints, but also the possibility to instantiate certain > attributes either as child elements or as attributes in a given > schema (that was on the original list of features we wanted for > P5). I would like to see this mentioned in the notes, so that we > can reference it, if the need arises. I'm not 100% sure, but I think they're the same thing. The ability to express in a schema that something (say the "engineType" of "automobile") is permitted as either an attribute or a child element is, of course, trivial. The difficult part, that DTDs cannot do, is to express that it is permitted as an attribute or a child element, but not both. RelaxNG permits this with a construct that I believe is called a "co-occurence constraint", but I'm not entirely sure that this phrase isn't reserved for a specific case[1]. Thus: element automobile { attribute engineType { "int_combustion" | "hybrid" | "electric" }, text } | element automobile { mixed { element engineType { text } } } expresses this "either or, but not both" constraint. This is the kind of thing I at least had in mind during the conference call. Of course just element automobile { attribute engineType { "int_combustion" | "hybrid" | "electric" }?, mixed { element engineType { text }? } } [2] with the prose "If engineType= is specified, then must not be a child; if engineType= is not specified, then one and only one child must be specified as a child" can be used to express this constraint until we have a way to express it in ODDs. (And furthermore, nifty Schematron constraints could be created to enforce such things; sample below.) Here are the test files I used when whipping up the above example. I have also included the error message from two different open source RelaxNG validators. I must admit, I don't understand the last error message from xmllint. -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: aet.rnc Url: http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/pipermail/tei-council/attachments/20040925/7895bd93/attachment.ksh -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: aet.errs Url: http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/pipermail/tei-council/attachments/20040925/7895bd93/attachment-0001.ksh -------------- next part -------------- Notes ----- [1] I know that's what it's called when a 'value' pattern of one node is used to change the content of another. This is usually used to have different content models for the same element depending on the value of an attribute. See http://books.xmlschemata.org/relaxng/ch09s02.html. [2] This is roughly the same as except that the RelaxNG constrains the document to at most 1 child. From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sat Sep 25 15:42:11 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:42:11 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <16725.51731.55041.850523@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > Here are the test files I used when whipping up the above example. I don't know why 3 of the 5 files I attached didn't make it through, but I can guess. I think the ones assigned MIME type text/xml didn't get through. They were the RelaxNG XML syntax schema, the test XML instance (deliberately invalid), and a Schemtron schema. If anyone actually wants to see them, let me know and I'll stick 'em up on the web. From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Sep 26 10:55:39 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 15:55:39 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <4156D86B.3030305@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd's explication of what might be meant by "co-occurrence" is interesting, but it leaves two questions unanswered a) does the Council, on mature reflection over the last few years, regard the ability to express this as a core requirement for the ODD language? my personal remembrance is that this sort of thing was discussed back at the start of the TEI Council as a good tool for the future of the TEI, but never again raised its head formally in any meetings of the council, or discussion on the META list, until about a month ago. But I may well have selective amnesia; and it might be regarded as so obvious a corollary of the Durand Conundrum that it didn't need explicating) b) if Council does wish the META group to allow for this ability in ODD, it's time to make concrete suggestions for a notation. I freely confess that I don't know where to start with it! Sebastian From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sun Sep 26 13:15:32 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 13:15:32 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <4156D86B.3030305@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <4156D86B.3030305@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16726.63796.775333.23430@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > b) if Council does wish the META group to allow for this ability > in ODD, it's time to make concrete suggestions for a notation. So soon? While I very much hope that the future of TEI includes the capability to constrain documents in manners more advanced than DTDs would allow, perhaps even using the full power of RelaxNG, I think META has very much earned a respite from continual work on the ODD language, and that we (Council) shouldn't start pestering you (META) with suggested syntaxes until you've had a breather. (The term "6 months" was bantered about during the call; I took this to be figurative, but surely you deserve more than 6 days?) From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Sep 26 13:29:09 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 18:29:09 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <16726.63796.775333.23430@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <4156D86B.3030305@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16726.63796.775333.23430@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <4156FC65.2030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: >>b) if Council does wish the META group to allow for this ability >> in ODD, it's time to make concrete suggestions for a notation. >> >> > >So soon? > yes. if it matters, it matters. > While I very much hope that the future of TEI includes the >capability to constrain documents in manners more advanced than DTDs >would allow, perhaps even using the full power of RelaxNG, I think >META has very much earned a respite from continual work on the ODD >language, and that we (Council) shouldn't start pestering you (META) >with suggested syntaxes until you've had a breather. (The term "6 >months" was bantered about during the call; I took this to be >figurative, but surely you deserve more than 6 days?) > the "6 months" I thought was "3 months"; but in any case what I meant by that was the the editors should have a guarentee of no more changes under their feet for the prescribed period. that does not at all preclude more work behind the scenes. one very very simple solution is to add an attribute to saying "this one's a dummy because its its been hand-declared in the content of the element". But I don't want to go down that line of discussion unless the Council says we ought to. Which is why I wanted a quick discussion here first. Sebastian From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Sep 26 23:09:48 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:09:48 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <4156FC65.2030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Sebastian Rahtz's message of "Sun, 26 Sep 2004 18:29:09 +0100") References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <4156D86B.3030305@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16726.63796.775333.23430@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <4156FC65.2030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Sebastian Rahtz writes: > Syd Bauman wrote: > >>>b) if Council does wish the META group to allow for this ability >>> in ODD, it's time to make concrete suggestions for a notation. >>So soon? >> > yes. if it matters, it matters. Well, the reason I brought this up was mainly to have it on record. I think we need to seriously consider the merits / de-merits of this road, including proven need for it and its implications for the whole of P5 etc., before we venture in this area. It does not look like we have the ressources for this at the moment, that's why I am very happy to have this whole issue filed until we come across a place where we actually need it. >> While I very much hope that the future of TEI includes the >>capability to constrain documents in manners more advanced than DTDs >>would allow, perhaps even using the full power of RelaxNG, I think >>META has very much earned a respite from continual work on the ODD >>language, and that we (Council) shouldn't start pestering you (META) >>with suggested syntaxes until you've had a breather. (The term "6 >>months" was bantered about during the call; I took this to be >>figurative, but surely you deserve more than 6 days?) >> > the "6 months" I thought was "3 months"; but in any case > what I meant by that was the the editors should have a guarentee > of no more changes under their feet for the prescribed period. that does > not at all preclude more work behind the scenes. > > one very very simple solution is to add an attribute to saying > "this one's > a dummy because its its been hand-declared in the content of the > element". But > I don't want to go down that line of discussion unless the Council > says we ought to. Which is why I wanted a quick discussion here first. > At the moment, honestly, I do not know the answer to this. The reason we pondered this particular case of co-occurrence constraint was that some CDATA attributes might need markup itself, so would better start life as a child element in some circumstances. At the moment, I am not sure if this argument still holds, since most of these CDATA attributes should be gone now, thanks to the mechanism. Lou, Syd, do you have any idea of which attributes might still be in need of such a construct? All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Sep 26 23:12:14 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:12:14 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> (Syd Bauman's message of "Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:33:05 -0400") References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: Syd Bauman writes: > [1 message body text ] > Note: in the following I am using "or" to mean "inclusive or" and "or > ... but not both" to mean "exclusive or", which is how I was taught > English in grade school. > >> Under item 3, I think we not only discussed co-occurrence >> constraints, but also the possibility to instantiate certain >> attributes either as child elements or as attributes in a given >> schema (that was on the original list of features we wanted for >> P5). I would like to see this mentioned in the notes, so that we >> can reference it, if the need arises. > > I'm not 100% sure, but I think they're the same thing. The ability to > express in a schema that something (say the "engineType" of > "automobile") is permitted as either an attribute or a child element > is, of course, trivial. The difficult part, that DTDs cannot do, is > to express that it is permitted as an attribute or a child element, > but not both. RelaxNG permits this with a construct that I believe is > called a "co-occurence constraint", but I'm not entirely sure that > this phrase isn't reserved for a specific case[1]. Sorry, I guess I was dense. Yes you are right, they are the same. As for the DTD, I think we thought this was a problem that should be solved at compile time -- you get the DTD either with the attributes, or with the child elements from Roma, but not both. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Mon Sep 27 09:10:13 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:10:13 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] Layout of P5 on the file system In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41581135.1070508@kantl.be> One of the items I want to bring up may seem trivial, and subject to much discussion, but is i.m.h.o. quite important: the lay-out of the printed version of the Guidelines. My students and staff have found the P3 layout easier to work with than the P4 lay-out. Especially for the reference secion in vol 2. One does occasionaly still consult the books, and in teaching situations it's still the first physical contact with the work of the TEI. Could we think about this (not as an item for the conference call, but as an issue in the process of releasing P5)? Edward Christian Wittern wrote: > Dear Council members, > > One of the issues I am pondering occasionally is how to improve the > thorny issue of dealing with the physical files of the TEI > Guidelines, its various Schemas, Stylesheets entities etc. I hope > that we can find a layout of the TEI subtree on the file system, > which makes it easier to understand, use and maintain. In this > context, I would like to recommend to the Councils attention a > document by the Debian XML team, which details the layout of the XML > subsystem in Debian GNU/Linux[1] and might serve as a good starting > point for defining our own policy. > > If council members would agree to this, I would like to propose to > similarily document the structure somewhere in the Guidelines and > implement it for P5. > > Comments? If no objections are raised, I will put this on the > agenda for our next call. > > All the best, > > Christian > > > [1] http://debian-xml-sgml.alioth.debian.org/xml-policy/index.html > -- ================ Edward Vanhoutte Co-ordinator Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies Reviews Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Sep 27 10:41:26 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:41:26 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Layout of P5 on the file system In-Reply-To: <41581135.1070508@kantl.be> References: <41581135.1070508@kantl.be> Message-ID: <41582696.9030001@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Edward Vanhoutte wrote: > One of the items I want to bring up may seem trivial, and subject to > much discussion, but is i.m.h.o. quite important: the lay-out of the > printed version of the Guidelines. My students and staff have found > the P3 layout easier to work with than the P4 lay-out. Especially for > the reference secion in vol 2. One does occasionaly still consult the > books, and in teaching situations it's still the first physical > contact with the work of the TEI. Could we think about this (not as an > item for the conference call, but as an issue in the process of > releasing P5)? The design of the printed page for P5 has not really been considered yet. So far as I am concerned (I consider myself the current pumpkin holder for production of printed Guidelines), nothing is fixed in stone at all. So any or all suggestions welcome. But please, say much more than "easier to work with"! concrete details are good, and alternative suggestions even better. If there is a group or individual who would like to consider a complete new implementation for making printed books, it would be great. P4 was done by an XSLT transform to XSL FO, and then typsetting using PassiveTeX. My current default route is XSLT transform to LaTeX and thence TeX typsetting. Sebastian From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Mon Sep 27 20:15:42 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 20:15:42 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <4156D86B.3030305@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16726.63796.775333.23430@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <4156FC65.2030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16728.44334.703185.788100@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > Syd, do you have any idea of which attributes might still be in > need of such a construct? Will try to get you an intelligent answer shortly, hopefully tomorrow, but just too tired to function right now. From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Tue Sep 28 04:38:13 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:38:13 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: (Christian Wittern's message of "25 Sep 2004 05:54:10 +0900") References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Christian Wittern writes: > Lou-at-home writes: > >> Now available for comment/correction at >> http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html > > Thank you; this was really fast, and my apologies for not looking > there immediately. > > Under item 3, I think we not only discussed co-occurrence constraints, > but also the possibility to instantiate certain attributes either as > child elements or as attributes in a given schema (that was on the > original list of features we wanted for P5). I would like to see this > mentioned in the notes, so that we can reference it, if the need > arises. > Since Syd convinced me that this is in fact covered under co-occurrence constraints, I don't think there is need to state the above explicitly in the notes. I am happy with the minutes as they are. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From david.durand at ingenta.com Thu Sep 30 14:40:07 2004 From: david.durand at ingenta.com (David G. Durand) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:40:07 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <26EA9400-1310-11D9-8703-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Several of Syd's models seemed complicated to me. The easy way to do this is the following: element automobile { ( attribute engineType { "int_combustion" | "hybrid" | "electric" } | element engineType { text } ), text } For IDREFS, a model like this would work kind of nicely. element target { (element targets { xsd:anyURI+ } | attribute target { xsd:anyURI } ) Actually, if we just allow the declaration of an attribute in the declaration of an element, can't we get this? So you could just use almost exactly the syntax above. The explicit attribute spec could be replaced by a pattern name, for a pattern generated by the ODD attribute list declaration, for something like this: element target { (element targets { xsd:anyURI+ } | tei.attribute.target ) not REALLY ready to propose a syntax, but it looks not as bad as it might seem. -- David David G. Durand Director, Electronic Publishing Services Ingenta Inc. 111R Chestnut St. Providence, RI 02903 USA T: +1 401-331-2014 x111 T: +1 401-935-5317 Mobile E: david.durand at ingenta.com From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Thu Sep 30 16:06:59 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:06:59 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] Notes from today;s conference call In-Reply-To: <26EA9400-1310-11D9-8703-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> References: <414F503A.8030603@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16725.51185.721788.232684@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <26EA9400-1310-11D9-8703-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Message-ID: <16732.26467.258918.531606@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > The easy way to do this is the following: > element automobile { > ( > attribute engineType { "int_combustion" | "hybrid" | "electric" } > | > element engineType { text } > ), > text > } Right, although I think this model has the further restriction that must precede any character data inside . > For IDREFS, a model like this would work kind of nicely. Right, but you misnamed the element. Also, we'd want separate children elements, not 1 child with lots of URIs (which would be just as hard to parse as if they were in attribute :-). So we'd want something like element ptr { ( element target { xsd:anyURI }+ | attribute target { xsd:anyURI } ) } And, of course, everything would have to use patterns for indirection; and we actually use the XML syntax in the ODDs. Thus the problem META will have to address (whether now, in "6 months", or never), is how to resolve the below so that the second in the points to it, and it is not instantiated elsewhere. specifies the destination of the pointer by supplying a single URI Reference. If there is more than one target, no target attribute should be specified, and instead a series of two or more target child elements should be used. A single URI Reference; may use the TEI XPointer schemes. Mind you I have no idea whether or not this implementable. Furthermore, I have not thought about what we'd do with usage= of . BTW, I'd be perfectly happy if for every "normal" TEI element X (i.e., those for which we do not want to take advantage of co-occurence constraints) we needed to specify somewhere inside its if it made this workable. I'm begining to think I should have posted this to the META list instead ... in fact, I'll cross-post it there, and if we want to continue this technical discussion I suggest we move it there. From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Fri Oct 1 02:15:52 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 15:15:52 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Report of the Council to the Members at MM04 Message-ID: Dear Councillors, As previously announced, I am compiling a report of the Council activities during this past year. This report will be based on the submissions I receive from Council members, so please do sent me some notes. While notes from every member are welcome, chairpersons of workgroups, taskforces and the like are required to report on their Activities. This report is part of how we explain to the Members, who pay for TEI activities, how well their money has been spent, and ideally should also be suitable for fund-raising activities. I therefore strongly encourage all of you to send me some inspiring notes of what you did in TEI land during the past 12 months. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sat Oct 2 23:39:53 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 23:39:53 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] SO issues, before the deadline! Message-ID: <16735.29833.522760.816488@cushing.cis.brown.edu> As actioned on the previous conference call, David and I have updated the "issues" document from the Stand-off Markup WG (with no voiced objections from WG members). In particular, sections have been added to address the issues "referred back to the WG" in Ghent: * the name of the main pointing attribute (target=), and * how to handle what in P4 are IDREFS (whitespace separated URIs) and the discussion of the new XPointer schemes the Guidelines will be defining has been greatly expanded. It would be really a good thing if every Councilor could read the entire document (it's not all that long) and express either agreement or suggested improvements within the next few days. If you can't read the whole thing, at least read the sections "Changes to Attributes", "Replacing IDREFS", and "Proposed additions to W3C Pointing schemes" and respond to the first two ASAP, preferably by Monday afternoon. It is available at http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.xml http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html In addition, the current draft of SA is available as http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow03.xml, but unless you're very curious, I wouldn't waste time with it yet, as David and I are still actively working on it. Hope to have a ready-for-first-look version up very soon, most likely Mon or Tue. From Laurent.Romary at loria.fr Sun Oct 3 05:38:06 2004 From: Laurent.Romary at loria.fr (Laurent Romary) Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:38:06 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] SO issues, before the deadline! In-Reply-To: <16735.29833.522760.816488@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <16735.29833.522760.816488@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: This seems to be a comprehensive set of proposals, which I would really suggest to stabilize for a while (in the same spirit as we decided to freeze the ODD mechanisms), so that we can, in particular, communicate widely on this to have a feedback from the TEI community at large (cf. TEI MM). My only 20 euroCents is that I agree to have a heterogeneous addressing system, i.e. I also feel at ease with the 1-origin addressing scheme for match. Best Laurent Le 3 oct. 04, ? 05:39, Syd Bauman a ?crit : > As actioned on the previous conference call, David and I have updated > the "issues" document from the Stand-off Markup WG (with no voiced > objections from WG members). In particular, sections have been added > to address the issues "referred back to the WG" in Ghent: > * the name of the main pointing attribute (target=), and > * how to handle what in P4 are IDREFS (whitespace separated URIs) > and the discussion of the new XPointer schemes the Guidelines will be > defining has been greatly expanded. > > It would be really a good thing if every Councilor could read the > entire document (it's not all that long) and express either agreement > or suggested improvements within the next few days. If you can't read > the whole thing, at least read the sections "Changes to Attributes", > "Replacing IDREFS", and "Proposed additions to W3C Pointing schemes" > and respond to the first two ASAP, preferably by Monday afternoon. > > It is available at > http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.xml > http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html > > In addition, the current draft of SA is available as > http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow03.xml, but unless you're very > curious, I wouldn't waste time with it yet, as David and I are still > actively working on it. Hope to have a ready-for-first-look version > up very soon, most likely Mon or Tue. > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Oct 3 19:05:49 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 08:05:49 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] SO issues, before the deadline! In-Reply-To: <16735.29833.522760.816488@cushing.cis.brown.edu> (Syd Bauman's message of "Sat, 2 Oct 2004 23:39:53 -0400") References: <16735.29833.522760.816488@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: Dear Syd, Dear David, Thanks for providing this document. I briefly read through it and did not immediately discover any problems. The handling of IDREFS looks now reasonable to me, much better than curly braces. All the best, Christian Syd Bauman writes: > As actioned on the previous conference call, David and I have updated > the "issues" document from the Stand-off Markup WG (with no voiced > objections from WG members). In particular, sections have been added > to address the issues "referred back to the WG" in Ghent: > * the name of the main pointing attribute (target=), and > * how to handle what in P4 are IDREFS (whitespace separated URIs) > and the discussion of the new XPointer schemes the Guidelines will be > defining has been greatly expanded. > > It would be really a good thing if every Councilor could read the > entire document (it's not all that long) and express either agreement > or suggested improvements within the next few days. If you can't read > the whole thing, at least read the sections "Changes to Attributes", > "Replacing IDREFS", and "Proposed additions to W3C Pointing schemes" > and respond to the first two ASAP, preferably by Monday afternoon. > > It is available at > http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.xml > http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html > > In addition, the current draft of SA is available as > http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow03.xml, but unless you're very > curious, I wouldn't waste time with it yet, as David and I are still > actively working on it. Hope to have a ready-for-first-look version > up very soon, most likely Mon or Tue. > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Tue Oct 5 00:04:12 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 13:04:12 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Council report (reminder) Message-ID: Dear Councilors, Please send reports of your TEI related activity to me (at wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp) immediately for inclusion in the Council report to the TEI Members Meeting. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu Tue Oct 12 09:40:21 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:40:21 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies Message-ID: Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please post any objections ASAP. --Julia From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Tue Oct 12 09:41:11 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:41:11 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <416BDEF7.1000105@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Julia Flanders wrote: > Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to > TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly > there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please > post any objections ASAP. on the contrary, seems an excellent plan. if we have any money and they do anything, they'd be a good candidate to upgrade into a full-scale working group sebastian From nsmith at email.unc.edu Tue Oct 12 09:44:49 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:44:49 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I heartily approve this proposal. I found it extremely timely (and meets our own interests here at UNC :-) best, ns Natasha (Natalia) Smith Digitization Librarian Wilson Library, CB#3990 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC 27514-8890 email: natalia_smith at unc.edu tel. (919) 962-9590 fax (919) 962-4452 http://docsouth.unc.edu/ On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Julia Flanders wrote: > Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to > TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly > there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please > post any objections ASAP. > > --Julia > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Tue Oct 12 10:05:58 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:05:58 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies Message-ID: <200410121457.i9CEvo2a014551@relay.hostbasket.com> No objections whatsoever. Timely proposal and important work. Edward > On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Julia Flanders wrote: > > > Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to > > TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly > > there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please > > post any objections ASAP. > > > > --Julia > > _______________________________________________ > > tei-council mailing list > > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council ================ Edward Vanhoutte Coordinator Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies Reviews Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Tue Oct 12 10:06:03 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:06:03 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies Message-ID: <200410121457.i9CEvt2a014560@relay.hostbasket.com> No objections whatsoever. Timely proposal and important work. Edward > On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Julia Flanders wrote: > > > Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to > > TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly > > there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please > > post any objections ASAP. > > > > --Julia > > _______________________________________________ > > tei-council mailing list > > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council ================ Edward Vanhoutte Coordinator Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies Reviews Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Tue Oct 12 19:03:35 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 08:03:35 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: (Julia Flanders's message of "Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:40:21 -0400") References: Message-ID: Julia Flanders writes: > Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to > TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly > there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please > post any objections ASAP. Looks very interesting, lets approve it. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Laurent.Romary at loria.fr Wed Oct 13 03:07:10 2004 From: Laurent.Romary at loria.fr (Laurent Romary) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:07:10 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80562A6C-1CE6-11D9-A9B0-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr> This proposal is OK, but should probably not limit its scope to just CRM. It is a general issue for P5 in particular to a) relate the description of elements to external sources that may provide a better semantic for them and b) import external description in complement to what P5 offers. Other sources maybe things llike the LOM (for education) the TC 37 DCR (linguistic concepts), OLAC-IMDI (metadata (cf. header)), etc. Laurent Le 12 oct. 04, ? 15:40, Julia Flanders a ?crit : > Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to > TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly > there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please > post any objections ASAP. > > --Julia > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Wed Oct 13 04:30:01 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:30:01 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: <80562A6C-1CE6-11D9-A9B0-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr> References: <80562A6C-1CE6-11D9-A9B0-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr> Message-ID: <416CE789.5060808@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> This is a SIG, right? so I don't think it's for the council to tell it what to do. If SIG members eventually decide to propose a workgroup, then the Council certainly should be involved, but at this stage I didn't think the council needs do more than say "good luck"! That said, I certainly agree with Laurent that we ought to be looking in P5 at ways of expanding on our current "gesture" towards providing interoperability with other ontologies. is only a start.... My recollection is that the original posting also suggested that Oyvind at least wants to provide input to a proposed TEI module for prosopographic elements. It's probably a good idea to keep the two things distinct. However both these issues can be discussed better face to face when the SIG meets! Laurent Romary wrote: > This proposal is OK, but should probably not limit its scope to just > CRM. It is a general issue for P5 in particular to a) relate the > description of elements to external sources that may provide a better > semantic for them and b) import external description in complement to > what P5 offers. > Other sources maybe things llike the LOM (for education) the TC 37 DCR > (linguistic concepts), OLAC-IMDI (metadata (cf. header)), etc. > Laurent > > > Le 12 oct. 04, ? 15:40, Julia Flanders a ?crit : > >> Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to >> TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly >> there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please >> post any objections ASAP. >> >> --Julia >> _______________________________________________ >> tei-council mailing list >> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU >> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council >> > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Oct 14 00:04:37 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:04:37 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Council report Message-ID: Dear colleagues, >From the feedback I got on my call and from memory etc, I have compiled a report for the Members Meeting, which Lou has massaged a bit and put up at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcr02.{x,ht}ml Please look at it! I assume that a sudden desire to improve this ("no, we can't possibly show it to the members like it is now!") will arise. Please send your imrprovements directly to Lou. I am also not sure about the last section -- it is there because it was there last year, but the report could do without it IMHO. If you want it to be there, we certainly will need a bit more input. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Oct 14 05:22:55 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:22:55 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Council report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <416E456F.5060209@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> I've already received a bit of additional input for the last section (thanks Edward!) which I personally found both interesting and informative -- how many other council members were aware that there was an excellent article introducing the TEI in a recent issue of LLC? -- so I'd like to encourage all of you to contribute a short list of what you've personally done for the TEI since taking up your position on the council. I think it's important to remember that the Council has an important role as the ultimate arbiter of the technical content of the TEI, and its members should therefore all be seen to be actively engaged in its development. It's not a competiton -- we all have conflicting demands on our time -- but I'm sure also that most of you have *something* to report. Anyway, I am happy to go on hacking bulleted lists into the report up until end-of-Monday next week (my time!) best wishes Lou Christian Wittern wrote: >Dear colleagues, > >>From the feedback I got on my call and from memory etc, I have >compiled a report for the Members Meeting, which Lou has massaged a >bit and put up at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcr02.{x,ht}ml > >Please look at it! I assume that a sudden desire to improve this >("no, we can't possibly show it to the members like it is now!") will >arise. Please send your imrprovements directly to Lou. > >I am also not sure about the last section -- it is there because it >was there last year, but the report could do without it IMHO. If you >want it to be there, we certainly will need a bit more input. > > >All the best, > >Christian > > > > > From alex.bia at ua.es Thu Oct 14 12:59:16 2004 From: alex.bia at ua.es (Alejandro Bia) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:59:16 +0200 Subject: [tei-council] please approve TEI SIG on ontologies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041014185816.043bfba0@aitana.cpd.ua.es> It's an excellent initiative. I firmly support it. Alex.- At 15:40 12/10/2004, Julia Flanders wrote: >Oyvind Eide has proposed a SIG on ontologies (see recent posting to >TEI-L). The Council approves all SIG proposals, and if we act swiftly >there's time for this one to meet at the TEI annual meeting. Please post >any objections ASAP. > >--Julia >_______________________________________________ >tei-council mailing list >tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU >http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council --------------------------------------------------------- ALEJANDRO BIA-PLATAS e-mail: alex.bia at ua.es Departamento de Estad?stica y Matem?tica Aplicada Universidad Miguel Hern?ndez Edificio Torretamarit Avenida de la Universidad s/n, E-03202, Elche, ESPA?A http://www.umh.es/ Tel: +34 966658542 Fax: +34 966658715 abia at umh.es Tel?fono m?vil: +34 610806427 --------------------------------------------------------- From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Oct 21 19:12:45 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:12:45 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Cancelled trip to Baltimore due to Taifun Message-ID: Dear Julia, As you might have heard in the news, a desastrous taifun has hit Japan in the past days. The eye passed right over Kansai Airport at the time I was supposed to leave for Baltimore, so the plane got diverted and I was told to wait. Unfortunately, weather conditions did not improve and I finally had to return home (which was no small task either) and wait for further notice. As it turned out, the flight was not cancelled, but "only" delayed by more then 24 hours. This, however, would prevent me from arriving in Baltimore in time for the meeting, so I had to give up on the trip. Fortunately, although even a few miles from here homes collapsed in landslides, family and friends in Japan are all unaffected. I would like to ask you to apologize on my behalf to the members at the meeting in Baltimore. I am very sorry that, as the chair of the technical council of the TEI, I have to miss such an important opportunity to get feedback from the TEI community and think about further directions, especially at a time when such important decisions about the further directions of the development of the TEI Guidelines have to be made. I trust that the meeting will be one of the rare opportunities of exchange between communities and individuals that are at other times separated by barriers of time, space and habit and hope that the fruits of this meeting will soon be visible in TEI land. All the best, Christian Wittern -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Julia_Flanders at Brown.Edu Sun Oct 24 22:49:14 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.Edu (Flanders, Julia) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 22:49:14 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] RE: Cancelled trip to Baltimore due to Taifun Message-ID: <1A97D3D73A03FC419D87967D3CE4760C4BC911@MAIL1.AD.Brown.Edu> Dear Christian, We were all glad to receive your email, as evidence that you were safe, and also very sorry to hear that you could not attend the meeting. You were very much missed. In your absence we displayed the photo of you in the airport, and Sebastian did a good job of presenting the council report and fielding questions. I won't attempt to summarize the various forms of feedback we received, but I'm sure that they will be reported on in due time by the editors and council members who were present. Best wishes on behalf of all of us--Julia -----Original Message----- From: Christian Wittern [mailto:wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp] Sent: Thu 10/21/04 19:12 To: Flanders, Julia Cc: tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU Subject: Cancelled trip to Baltimore due to Taifun Dear Julia, As you might have heard in the news, a desastrous taifun has hit Japan in the past days. The eye passed right over Kansai Airport at the time I was supposed to leave for Baltimore, so the plane got diverted and I was told to wait. Unfortunately, weather conditions did not improve and I finally had to return home (which was no small task either) and wait for further notice. As it turned out, the flight was not cancelled, but "only" delayed by more then 24 hours. This, however, would prevent me from arriving in Baltimore in time for the meeting, so I had to give up on the trip. Fortunately, although even a few miles from here homes collapsed in landslides, family and friends in Japan are all unaffected. I would like to ask you to apologize on my behalf to the members at the meeting in Baltimore. I am very sorry that, as the chair of the technical council of the TEI, I have to miss such an important opportunity to get feedback from the TEI community and think about further directions, especially at a time when such important decisions about the further directions of the development of the TEI Guidelines have to be made. I trust that the meeting will be one of the rare opportunities of exchange between communities and individuals that are at other times separated by barriers of time, space and habit and hope that the fruits of this meeting will soon be visible in TEI land. All the best, Christian Wittern -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu Tue Oct 26 12:55:27 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:55:27 -0400 Subject: [tei-council] new TEI Council members Message-ID: I am happy to announce that in the recent TEI election, the following people were elected or re-elected to the TEI council: Alejandro Bia James Cummings Susan Schreibman John Walsh Their terms begin on January 1, 2005 and end on December 31, 2006. The new members have been added to the Council listserv immediately so that they can listen and participate in discussion, but they will not vote until their terms officially begin. Welcome, James and John, and welcome back, Alex, and Susan! best wishes, Julia Julia Flanders Chair, TEI Consortium Brown University From Laurent.Romary at loria.fr Fri Nov 5 13:27:30 2004 From: Laurent.Romary at loria.fr (Laurent Romary) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 19:27:30 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Compound Document Formats Message-ID: <5AAAE2FE-2F58-11D9-806D-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr> Dear all, Is there any one of us keeping track of the work intiated in W3C on compound document formats (http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/)? There could be some cross-fertilization with the kind of recommendation we want to put in P5 on mixing document models (e.g. TEI+SVG+MathML; TEI+Docbook, etc.) Best Laurent From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 7 16:10:54 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 21:10:54 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Compound Document Formats In-Reply-To: <5AAAE2FE-2F58-11D9-806D-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr> References: <5AAAE2FE-2F58-11D9-806D-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr> Message-ID: <418E8F5E.2080009@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> They'll probably produce a W3C-centric view of the world only (ie XHTML is king, W3C schema is only recommended way foward etc) but I agree, it would be interesting to see the insides of the discussion. is anyone here a W3C member? sebastian From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 7 18:07:21 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 08:07:21 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] new TEI Council members In-Reply-To: (Julia Flanders's message of "Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:55:27 -0400") References: Message-ID: Dear Council members, I would like to extend my welcome to the new members, James and John and to the reelected members Alejandro and Susan! This seems like a very good mixture between continuity and change and I am looking forward to work with you! And I would like to thank David Birnbaum and David Durand for devoting their time and energy to the work here on the Council, which has been much appreciated. The TEI Council is doing most of its business via this list or conference calls, in recent years we did have one face to face meeting a year, that happened to be in May on the last occasions. Our next conference call is scheduled for Nov. 29, 1300 UTC. -- The information about the call is outdated, Perry used to host the calls when he was in Indiana, then David Durand took over hosting them. I will post call information together with the agenda here a week or so before the call. BTW, it looks like we have to look for a new host next year, with David rotating off the Council. On the TEI website at http://www.tei-c.org/Council are some pages with minutes and other information about the work of the council. All the best, Christian Wittern -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 7 18:16:19 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 23:16:19 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] new TEI Council members In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <418EACC3.3080400@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> It might be appropriate to start considering how to spend the relatively limited funds we have for meetings. Do we want a May meeting in 2005? does anyone want to host it, if so? which work groups want to meet? There is, I would argue, a relatively urgent need to finance a meeting to manage an overhaul of the TEI class system before too long. If that was classed, for the sake of argument, as a META meeting, it would be one lien on the funds. More bids? Sebastian From nsmith at email.unc.edu Wed Nov 10 13:12:45 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:12:45 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [tei-council] Fwd: Some things never change... (fwd) Message-ID: i thought you might enjoy and weep with us all... An image with the 2004 election voting pattern map beside a pre-civil war free vs. slave states map. and http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14832124&method=full&siteid=50143&headline=god-help-america-name_page.html ns From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Nov 11 12:15:53 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:15:53 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing Message-ID: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I think) accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced by a global xml:lang attribute; likewise the Standoff WG has proposed and the Council is (I think) still ruminating about the notion that the global "id" attribute should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute. Pondering how to actually implement these proposals in P5 without causing too much havoc, I have reached the conclusion that it would be both feasible and advisable to make the transition in a rather more cautious way. I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to lang in the definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a replacement for it. (And similarly xml:lang). By "alternative" here I mean that a given element can specify one or the other but not both (supplying both would in any case be impossible since both have ID declared values). The current ODD syntax already supports this -- we added it art Christian's suggestion during the Paris Meta meeting -- and indeed uses it for similar backwards- compatibility-reasons in the definition for I think. The schemas generated do exactly the same thing: the DTD generated may need some further hand adjustment. I think it is a good idea to hedge our bets about the take up of W3C recommendations in this way, and it will definitely make the job of moving legacy data to P5 a whole lot easier. Not least for us! Comments? Lou From djbpitt+tei at pitt.edu Thu Nov 11 13:50:57 2004 From: djbpitt+tei at pitt.edu (David J Birnbaum) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:50:57 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <1397898621.1100181057@birnbaum.slavic.pitt.edu> Dear Lou (cc Council), I apologize if I've forgotten some important explanatory detail, but I don't understand the advantage of hedging our bets here. Can you elaborate a bit? Thanks, David --On Thursday, November 11, 2004 5:15 PM +0000 Lou Burnard wrote:r > The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I think) > accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced by a global > xml:lang attribute; likewise the Standoff WG has proposed and the Council > is (I think) still ruminating about the notion that the global "id" > attribute should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute. > > Pondering how to actually implement these proposals in P5 without causing > too much havoc, I have reached the conclusion that it would be both > feasible and advisable to make the transition in a rather more cautious > way. I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to lang in the > definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a replacement for > it. (And similarly xml:lang). By "alternative" here I mean that a given > element can specify one or the other but not both (supplying both would > in any case be impossible since both have ID declared values). The > current ODD syntax already supports this -- we added it art Christian's > suggestion during the Paris Meta meeting -- and indeed uses it for > similar backwards- compatibility-reasons in the definition for I > think. The schemas generated do exactly the same thing: the DTD generated > may need some further hand adjustment. > > I think it is a good idea to hedge our bets about the take up of W3C > recommendations in this way, and it will definitely make the job of > moving legacy data to P5 a whole lot easier. Not least for us! > > Comments? > > Lou > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council ________ Professor David J. Birnbaum Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures 1417 Cathedral of Learning University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA Voice: 1 412 624 5712 Fax: 1 412 624 9714 Email: djbpitt+ at pitt.edu URL: http://clover.slavic.pitt.edu/~djb/ From david.durand at ingenta.com Thu Nov 11 15:16:38 2004 From: david.durand at ingenta.com (David G. Durand) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:16:38 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <97B649F8-341E-11D9-813B-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> I'm assuming that I'm still a council member until the end of the calendar year... I don't like this idea at all, nor the one (apparently) discussed at the TEI members' meeting. As roughly described to me second-hand, it seems to have been a proposal that we should rename elements and attributes changed as to function in P5 so that it will be easier to extend P4 by the re-addition of p4 elements that have been replaced by newer functions/notations in P5. We shouldn't (and can't under our own rules) prevent people from using any tagging practices we want, but I don't think we should "ease migration" in a way that allows existing P4 documents to become P5 documents without updating the markup. There's no shame at staying with P4 if that suits one's needs. The decision to allow non-compatible changes is a good one in that it enables things to be cleaned up without constraint as to compatibility, and that's a good thing, I think. Renaming things just to make using the old names easier is bad because it makes the new names less useful, and the whole issue of support _more_ complicated. In the XML committee we had a slogan of not being "gratuitously incompatible" with SGML, and in that situation the need for backward compatibility seemed much stronger. I'd also note that XML itself could have been more incompatible without serious problems, as things turned out. I don't really see how it helps in moving legacy data: for xml:id, you have to add a '#'. For xml:lang you have to make up a table converting whatever strings you used in your TEI "lang" to the standard strings as defined by the ISO and W3C. P5 is going to have to go through a process of acceptance and tool building (as previous versions have) and the center of gravity will slowly shift to the newer version, as people so the work of conversion. People will have to compare the effort of touching old data and shifting their tool environment, versus staying with the old markup and foregoing the improvements of P5, or the duplicated effort if they maintain data in both formats and thus have to deal with two separate tool chains. Granted this can be a hard decision to make, and will certainly involve some extra work if one wants to use new P5 features or tools, but it seems to me that that's the reality of this kind of work. I'd be more sympathetic if I thought that people _had_ to move to the new world, but they can linger on the margins of P4 as long as they want. They can even add stuff from P5 into P4 if they want to. If we're to make a break (and we've decided that long ago), I say that it should be a clean break, with no guilty half-measures or apologies. -- David On Nov 11, 2004, at 12:15 PM, Lou Burnard wrote: > The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I think) > accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced by a > global xml:lang attribute; likewise the Standoff WG has proposed and > the Council is (I think) still ruminating about the notion that the > global "id" attribute should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute. > > Pondering how to actually implement these proposals in P5 without > causing too much havoc, I have reached the conclusion that it would be > both feasible and advisable to make the transition in a rather more > cautious way. I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to > lang in the definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a > replacement for it. (And similarly xml:lang). By "alternative" here I > mean that a given element can specify one or the other but not both > (supplying both would in any case be impossible since both have ID > declared values). The current ODD syntax already supports this -- we > added it art Christian's suggestion during the Paris Meta meeting -- > and indeed uses it for similar backwards- compatibility-reasons in the > definition for I think. The schemas generated do exactly the > same thing: the DTD generated may need some further hand adjustment. > > I think it is a good idea to hedge our bets about the take up of W3C > recommendations in this way, and it will definitely make the job of > moving legacy data to P5 a whole lot easier. Not least for us! > > Comments? > > Lou > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > David G. Durand Director, Electronic Publishing Services Ingenta Inc. 111R Chestnut St. Providence, RI 02903 USA T: +1 401-331-2014 x111 T: +1 401-935-5317 Mobile E: david.durand at ingenta.com From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Nov 11 17:22:50 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:22:50 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <97B649F8-341E-11D9-813B-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <97B649F8-341E-11D9-813B-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Message-ID: <4193E63A.5090502@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Hi David I hope you'll continue giving us your views even after you cease to be a council member! The idea of the P4 compatibility module presented to the TEI members meeting is not the point at issue here, and it's a somewhat irrelevant rhetorical move to conflate the two. Although it's true that I might advance some similar arguments in favour of producing a compatibility module to those I will advance in favour of the "retain id and lang" proposal, that doesn't mean that they're the same point, and in any case I don't think they're the only arguments. And I'm NOT in fact proposing a compatibility module at this point. As I understand it, the argument for replacing "lang" with "xml:lang" is fundamentally that the latter has been recommended by W3C with a semantics more or less identical to that identified by the TEI for "lang". The argument goes on to assert that any new software likely to be developed will pay more attention to W3C recommendations than to TEI ones and that we should therefore go with the majority. I don't disagree with that recommendation entirely (though I seem to recall that the CE workgroup wasn't unanimous on this point -- Espen in particular was quite strongly against it): my suggestion is not that we should try to keep lang to the exclusion of xml:lang. Rather it is that we should allow for a transitional period in which existing TEI software which does understand and use "lang" in exactly the same way that software yet to be constructed will presumably use "xml:lang" should continue to be usable in the new regime. It's more about software than data: as you correctly point out, legacy data may need to be changed anyway if it doesn't use the right language identifiers. But not all of it needs to be changed, and it surely can't be a bad idea to make transition to P5 less of an obstacle if we can do so. It's all very well to say we'll go on supporting P4 and people can stick with that if they like, but there are a lot of good things in P5 that will never be retrofitted to P4! The new module system, the new ODDs, the improvements in the core modules, the new modules like MS and gaiji -- these are things we want people to start using now, and which the TEI community wants to take up. So I think we ought to try at least a little to be more accomodating, where we can do so without too much effort or confusion. My suggestion is that allowing for the old names to subsist, as alternates for the new ones, buys us a lot in terms of lowering the entry price, at virtually no additional cost in maintaining duplicate tool chains. OK, new tools have to allow for either lang or xml:lang and have to process them identically. But that's it. The case with id and xml:id seems more or less the same to me. The point you make about having to change the values of this attribute in legacy data seems mistaken: surely the new version of id="foo" is xml:id="foo", not xml:id="#foo"? Where data has to change is in the value of the "target" attribute surely? In which case I'd also like to put on the agenda for the discussion the possibly heretical suggestion that we might choose to *retain* target="foo" (for the benefit of legacy systems that understand ID/IDREF) as an alternative for url="#foo" (or whatever its name is to be). Note however that I'm not suggesting that we should also attempt to retain the whole baggage of the TEI extended pointer syntax, etc. -- just that we keep the ability to use the shedloads of existing tools which use target and id in anticipation of the great dawn of xlink-aware software that is just around the corner.... (still) Lou David G. Durand wrote: > I'm assuming that I'm still a council member until the end of the > calendar year... > > I don't like this idea at all, nor the one (apparently) discussed at the > TEI members' meeting. As roughly described to me second-hand, it seems > to have been a proposal that we should rename elements and attributes > changed as to function in P5 so that it will be easier to extend P4 by > the re-addition of p4 elements that have been replaced by newer > functions/notations in P5. > > We shouldn't (and can't under our own rules) prevent people from using > any tagging practices we want, but I don't think we should "ease > migration" in a way that allows existing P4 documents to become P5 > documents without updating the markup. There's no shame at staying with > P4 if that suits one's needs. The decision to allow non-compatible > changes is a good one in that it enables things to be cleaned up without > constraint as to compatibility, and that's a good thing, I think. > Renaming things just to make using the old names easier is bad because > it makes the new names less useful, and the whole issue of support > _more_ complicated. > > In the XML committee we had a slogan of not being "gratuitously > incompatible" with SGML, and in that situation the need for backward > compatibility seemed much stronger. I'd also note that XML itself could > have been more incompatible without serious problems, as things turned out. > > I don't really see how it helps in moving legacy data: for xml:id, you > have to add a '#'. For xml:lang you have to make up a table converting > whatever strings you used in your TEI "lang" to the standard strings as > defined by the ISO and W3C. > > P5 is going to have to go through a process of acceptance and tool > building (as previous versions have) and the center of gravity will > slowly shift to the newer version, as people so the work of conversion. > > People will have to compare the effort of touching old data and shifting > their tool environment, versus staying with the old markup and foregoing > the improvements of P5, or the duplicated effort if they maintain data > in both formats and thus have to deal with two separate tool chains. > Granted this can be a hard decision to make, and will certainly involve > some extra work if one wants to use new P5 features or tools, but it > seems to me that that's the reality of this kind of work. > > I'd be more sympathetic if I thought that people _had_ to move to the > new world, but they can linger on the margins of P4 as long as they > want. They can even add stuff from P5 into P4 if they want to. > > If we're to make a break (and we've decided that long ago), I say that > it should be a clean break, with no guilty half-measures or apologies. > > -- David > > On Nov 11, 2004, at 12:15 PM, Lou Burnard wrote: > >> The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I think) >> accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced by a >> global xml:lang attribute; likewise the Standoff WG has proposed and >> the Council is (I think) still ruminating about the notion that the >> global "id" attribute should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute. >> >> Pondering how to actually implement these proposals in P5 without >> causing too much havoc, I have reached the conclusion that it would be >> both feasible and advisable to make the transition in a rather more >> cautious way. I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to >> lang in the definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a >> replacement for it. (And similarly xml:lang). By "alternative" here I >> mean that a given element can specify one or the other but not both >> (supplying both would in any case be impossible since both have ID >> declared values). The current ODD syntax already supports this -- we >> added it art Christian's suggestion during the Paris Meta meeting -- >> and indeed uses it for similar backwards- compatibility-reasons in the >> definition for I think. The schemas generated do exactly the >> same thing: the DTD generated may need some further hand adjustment. >> >> I think it is a good idea to hedge our bets about the take up of W3C >> recommendations in this way, and it will definitely make the job of >> moving legacy data to P5 a whole lot easier. Not least for us! >> >> Comments? >> >> Lou >> >> _______________________________________________ >> tei-council mailing list >> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU >> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council >> >> > > David G. Durand > Director, Electronic Publishing Services > Ingenta Inc. > 111R Chestnut St. > Providence, RI 02903 USA > > T: +1 401-331-2014 x111 > T: +1 401-935-5317 Mobile > E: david.durand at ingenta.com > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Nov 11 19:29:04 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:29:04 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] to id or not to id Message-ID: <419403D0.7020300@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> One could argue that the core should remain pure, and have only xml:id and xml:lang. But that a P4 compatibility module could introduce the @id/@xml:id choice. This would have the advantage that P5 users who wanted to work in this way would have to be more explicit about it, by adding a new module to their portfolio. I find it hard to decide which way I want to vote on this, I must say. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Thu Nov 11 18:45:28 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:45:28 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I > think) accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced > by a global xml:lang attribute; I don't believe Council has approved this; at least, the minutes don't reflect any such decision. > ... the Standoff WG has proposed and the Council is (I think) > still ruminating about the notion that the global "id" attribute > should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute. Council explicitly approved replacing id= with xml:id= at the 2004-05 meeting in Ghent. > I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to lang in the > definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a replacement > for it. (And similarly xml:lang). This seems like it could be quite problematic for anyone trying to write software that could do something intelligent with unmodified TEI P5 files. With this proposal authors of such software would need to be able to process * ID/IDREF using id=, and * XPointers using xml:id=, and * lang= pointing to via ID/IDREF, and * xml:lang= being an RFC 3066 (or successor) language tag & potentially pointing to via ident= Seems a bit scary. In addition, if I use one methodology and you use the other, we've got yet another barrier to interchange. > I think it is a good idea to hedge our bets about the take up of > W3C recommendations in this way, I'm not entirely sure why. It's not as if there are dozens of processing systems out there that can do the right thing with lang=, but won't be able to handle xml:lang=. Same for id=, really, with the obvious exception of validators. We didn't hedge any bets about the take up of RelaxNG, and it doesn't have a multinational cartel -- I mean consortium -- of software companies backing it. Of course, if it's IP issues you're concerned with ... sigh. > and it will definitely make the job of moving legacy data to P5 a > whole lot easier. My first reaction was "no it won't", but that's not true. It could, at least for the case of xml:lang=. For xml:id=, I can't imagine that there won't be software to perform instance conversion. Heck, if your project has constrained its data such that an equals sign ("=") is not permitted except when used as a VI, the IDREF -> XPointer conversion can be done with a one-line Perl script[1]. (IDREFS is a little harder.) Even for those projects that do use "=" in places other than as a VI (i.e., in content, attribute values, comments, PIs, and CDATA marked sections), it can't be that difficult an XSLT stylesheet, can it? Perhaps my low level of mastery of XSLT is shining through here, but especially in XSLT2 such a thing should be reasonably easy, no? However, if this "choice of lang= or xml:lang= but not both" proposal is not adopted, then those converting legacy data will have to go about creating a look-up table that will convert their local lang= values (which are by definition arbitrary IDREFs) into xml:lang= values (which will be by definition RFC 3066 or its successor language tags). While many many projects will be able to create a single table capable of being used for all their P4 files, it is conceivable that a different look-up table would need to be created for each instance to be converted. Could be a pain. Of course, many projects actually deliberately choose to use RFC 3066 language tags as the value of id= of (and thus of lang=) already, and thus wouldn't have to do anything special. I just checked the WWP text-base, and of the over 850 valid occurrences of id= of [2], it seems at first glance as though only 3 are not already valid RFC 3066 language tags. They are "British", "German", and "zzx", which is our local code for "I don't know". The main problem I foresee pertains to people who have stretched the meaning of "language" a wee bit, and have things like and in their files. > Not least for us! Who's us? While the TEI-C certainly has lots of data lying around in P4 format, is there a strong reason to migrate it all to P5? It appears we have a history of leaving things in older formats -- there are still files on the website in Waterloo GML and LaTeX. (Although to somebody's credit (probably Lou's), plain-text equivalents are usually provided as well.) Notes ----- [1] s{(code |copyOf |depPtr |end |follow |from |grpPtr |hand |lang |location |mergedin |new |next |old |origin |parent |prev |render |resp |sameAs |scheme |script |since |start |target |to |value |who)=(["'])([^'" \t\n\r\f]+['"])} {\1=\2#\3}xg; [2] Embarrassingly there were a few *invalid* specifications, which I should probably go fix shortly. Sigh. From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Thu Nov 11 19:24:45 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:24:45 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: > > This seems like it could be quite problematic for anyone trying to > write software that could do something intelligent with unmodified > TEI P5 files. With this proposal authors of such software would need > to be able to process > * ID/IDREF using id=, and > * XPointers using xml:id=, and > * lang= pointing to via ID/IDREF, and > * xml:lang= being an RFC 3066 (or successor) language tag & > potentially pointing to via ident= Taking these in turn: * ID/IDREF would stay exactly the same * xml:id doesn't supply an xpointer so why would processors need to handle one? * @lang doesn't point to but to and would continue to do so * @xml:lang if supplied can only provide an RF6 3066 code, so doesnt need to point to anything -- my guess is that many people who are fed up with having to supply a element would regard this as a big step forward! > > I'm not entirely sure why. It's not as if there are dozens of > processing systems out there that can do the right thing with lang=, > but won't be able to handle xml:lang=. Same for id=, really, with the > obvious exception of validators. depends what you think the right thing is. i think that handling id/idref is all that's involved, and there are hundreds of processors that do that > My first reaction was "no it won't", but that's not true. It could, > at least for the case of xml:lang=. Good. Your second reaction is an improvement! > > For xml:id=, I can't imagine that there won't be software to perform > instance conversion. Data conversion is always possible, of course. The aim here is to reduce the number of times it is *essential*. > However, if this "choice of lang= or xml:lang= but not both" proposal > is not adopted, then those converting legacy data will have to go > about creating a look-up table that will convert their local lang= > values (which are by definition arbitrary IDREFs) into xml:lang= > values (which will be by definition RFC 3066 or its successor > language tags). No they won't. My proposal is exactly that they don't have to convert their instance data at all. > Of course, many projects actually deliberately choose to use RFC 3066 > language tags as the value of id= of (and thus of lang=) > already, and thus wouldn't have to do anything special. Quite. > The main problem I foresee pertains to people who have stretched the > meaning of "language" a wee bit, and have things like > > and > > in their files. This problem will raise its head in the element indicated (of which there will, by definition, be only one instance). That has an ISO639 attribute which should give the intended correspondence, of course. >> >>Not least for us! > > > Who's us? While the TEI-C certainly has lots of data lying around in > P4 format, is there a strong reason to migrate it all to P5? It > appears we have a history of leaving things in older formats -- there > are still files on the website in Waterloo GML and LaTeX. (Although > to somebody's credit (probably Lou's), plain-text equivalents are > usually provided as well.) > I was thinking more of our current tool chain. > From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Thu Nov 11 19:44:39 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:44:39 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <97B649F8-341E-11D9-813B-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <97B649F8-341E-11D9-813B-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Message-ID: <16788.1911.109444.651620@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > I'm assuming that I'm still a council member until the end of the > calendar year... Yes, your term ends 31 Dec 04. From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Nov 11 19:51:16 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 09:51:16 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Lou Burnard's message of "Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:15:53 +0000") References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Lou Burnard writes: > The Character set workgroup has proposed and the Council has (I think) > accepted that the global lang attribute should be replaced by a global > xml:lang attribute; likewise the Standoff WG has proposed and the > Council is (I think) still ruminating about the notion that the global > "id" attribute should be replaced by a global xml:id attribute. > > Pondering how to actually implement these proposals in P5 without > causing too much havoc, I have reached the conclusion that it would be > both feasible and advisable to make the transition in a rather more > cautious way. I am proposing to add xml:lang as an *alternative* to lang > in the definition for tei.global.attributes rather than as a > replacement for it. I think we should do what we can to make the transition to P5 easier, on the other hand, I do not see much to be gained in making a half-way transition possible, let alone recommending it. The value TEI requires for lang has to follow ISO 639 and RFC 3066 (might be wrong with the number..) and xml:lang does so similarily, except that it point to newer versions that are themselves backward compatible. In most cases, there will be no change necessary. So I do not really see what is to be gained by allowing lang. The case is of course different with xml:id, and the whole ID/IDREF stuff -- as I understand the current situation, there will be an option to retain ID/IDREF processing in schemata that have this notion, no? All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Thu Nov 11 20:04:27 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:04:27 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <4193E63A.5090502@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <97B649F8-341E-11D9-813B-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> <4193E63A.5090502@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16788.3099.342698.980837@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > ... my suggestion is not that we should try to keep lang to the > exclusion of xml:lang. Rather it is that we should allow for a > transitional period in which existing TEI software which does > understand and use "lang" in exactly the same way that software > yet to be constructed will presumably use "xml:lang" should > continue to be usable in the new regime. OK, I'll bite. What software do you have in mind? Could this software be used on a P5 file at all? I'm thinking that if there does exist software that intelligently makes use of the lang= of TEI P4 files, that software is going to need to be reworked quite a lot to process a P5 file in the first place. Is there really an enormous advantage to delaying changing the part of the code that handles lang= so that at reads "xml:lang" instead of "lang" and doesn't depend on their being a corresponding ? > It's more about software than data: as you correctly point out, > legacy data may need to be changed anyway if it doesn't use the > right language identifiers. But legacy software needs to be changed anyway, too. > ... it surely can't be a bad idea to make transition to P5 less > of an obstacle if we can do so. That depends entirely on the cost of the construct (for lack of a better word) being implemented to make transition less of an obstacle. If (as in this case) the cost of the construct that would make transition easier also makes P5 a weaker specification, then yes, it may be a bad idea. > So I think we ought to try at least a little to be more > accomodating, where we can do so without too much effort or > confusion. I think presenting users with "you can use either lang= or xml:lang=" and "either id= or xml:id=" is, in fact, adding confusion. The question is whether or not the extra ease in migration is worth the added confusion. Personally, I don't think so, but I'm willing to be convinced. > My suggestion is that allowing for the old names to subsist, as > alternates for the new ones, buys us a lot in terms of lowering > the entry price, at virtually no additional cost in maintaining > duplicate tool chains. OK, new tools have to allow for either > lang or xml:lang and have to process them identically. But that's > it. While I guess it does lower the entry price, seems like a pretty significant cost to me. > The case with id and xml:id seems more or less the same to me. > The point you make about having to change the values of this > attribute in legacy data seems mistaken: surely the new version > of id="foo" is xml:id="foo", not xml:id="#foo"? Where data has to > change is in the value of the "target" attribute surely? Absolutely, it's the IDREF and IDREFS attribute values that need to be changed to have the preceding "#". From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Nov 11 20:06:55 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:06:55 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Lou Burnard's message of "Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:24:45 +0000") References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Lou Burnard writes: > Syd Bauman wrote: > > >> However, if this "choice of lang= or xml:lang= but not both" proposal >> is not adopted, then those converting legacy data will have to go >> about creating a look-up table that will convert their local lang= >> values (which are by definition arbitrary IDREFs) into xml:lang= >> values (which will be by definition RFC 3066 or its successor >> language tags). > > No they won't. My proposal is exactly that they don't have to convert > their instance data at all. > > >> Of course, many projects actually deliberately choose to use RFC 3066 >> language tags as the value of id= of (and thus of lang=) >> already, and thus wouldn't have to do anything special. > > Quite. On the element, P4X says the following: On this element, the global id attribute specifies the identifier for the writing system declaration for this language (e.g. eng, fra, deu). Its value will usually be a language identifier from ISO 639, possibly extended to indicate the writing system in use (e.g. heb-hel for Hebrew written in Greek. If people did follow this recommendation, there is no need for them to convert any instance data. BTW, do you plan to retain lang as a IDREF? -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Nov 11 20:07:37 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:07:37 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16788.1911.109444.651620@cushing.cis.brown.edu> (Syd Bauman's message of "Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:44:39 -0500") References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <97B649F8-341E-11D9-813B-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> <16788.1911.109444.651620@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: Syd Bauman writes: >> I'm assuming that I'm still a council member until the end of the >> calendar year... > > Yes, your term ends 31 Dec 04. > But you will continue as the chair of the SO workgroup:-) All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Thu Nov 11 20:08:46 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:08:46 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] to id or not to id In-Reply-To: <419403D0.7020300@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <419403D0.7020300@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16788.3358.366994.165657@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > One could argue that the core should remain pure, and have only > xml:id and xml:lang. But that a P4 compatibility module could > introduce the @id/@xml:id choice. This would have the advantage > that P5 users who wanted to work in this way would have to be > more explicit about it, by adding a new module to their > portfolio. This is, in fact, what the SO work-group recommended. Council did not explicitly address the suggestion for the add-on module that swaps id= for xml:id=, IDREF for tei.pointer, and IDREFS for tei.pointers. In principle I think such a module is a good idea, whether it's just an ID/IDREF module or a complete "P4 Compatibility" module. (Or both. :-) From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Thu Nov 11 21:06:46 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:06:46 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > * ID/IDREF would stay exactly the same Yes, it would, but that doesn't change my point. Software being written to process P5 files as they are currently envisioned would not have to know how to process ID/IDREF. If the "id= or xml:id=" proposal is implemented, such software would have to know how to do this. Furthermore, software would have to be able to process XPointers pointing to id=, XPointers pointing to xml:id=, IDREFs pointing to id=, and IDREFs pointing to xml:id=. (The last of which may present a bit of a problem when there's no DTD available.) > * xml:id doesn't supply an xpointer so why would processors need to > handle one? Because that's how you point at one. Yes, I know xml:id= merely supplies an ID and thus can be pointed at by IDREF, but you weren't suggesting that, were you? > * @lang doesn't point to but to and would > continue to do so Right, sorry for the slip. But I think you may be missing my point, because you say "would continue to do so" as if that were a good thing, whereas my point was that it would continue to do so, and that's a bad thing because software vendors would have to deal with it. > * @xml:lang if supplied can only provide an RF6 3066 code, so > doesnt need to point to anything -- my guess is that many people > who are fed up with having to supply a element would > regard this as a big step forward! Right. But again, my point is that software reading a P5 file would need to be prepared to handle both lang= and xml:lang=, even in the same document. The big step forward (not needing a ) is available to P5 users whether or not we implement the "lang= OR xml:lang=" proposal. > depends what you think the right thing is. i think that handling > id/idref is all that's involved, and there are hundreds of > processors that do that I don't understand. First, what software other than validators (which don't actually *do* anything, really) and XSLT style-sheets (which, if I understand correctly, will be quite easy to convert) handle ID/IDREF of lang= and ? In my mind, the right thing is going to be processing of the content in a manner that's dependent on its language. E.g.m, speaking German passages in German; or different coloring in printed output; or looking up a word in a language-specific dictionary when it's clicked. > > For xml:id=, I can't imagine that there won't be software to > > perform instance conversion. > Data conversion is always possible, of course. The aim here is to > reduce the number of times it is *essential*. I suspect you've misspoken here, in that this aim doesn't support your position -- data conversion is essential in 100% of cases, whether or not we go with the "id= OR xml:id=" proposal. Perhaps what you meant was that the aim here is to reduce the number of things that have to be changed or the number of steps in the conversion process? > > However, if this "choice of lang= or xml:lang= but not both" > > proposal is not adopted, then those converting legacy data will > > have to go about creating a look-up table that will convert their > > local lang= values (which are by definition arbitrary IDREFs) > > into xml:lang= values (which will be by definition RFC 3066 or > > its successor language tags). > No they won't. My proposal is exactly that they don't have to > convert their instance data at all. Right. The above quoted passage starts with "... is *not* adopted ..." (emphasis added). But that said, 100% of all P4 instances will have to be converted. None will be valid P5 without some conversion. > > The main problem I foresee pertains to people who have stretched > > the meaning of "language" a wee bit, and have things like > > > > and > > > > in their files. > > This problem will raise its head in the element > indicated (of which there will, by definition, be only one > instance). That has an ISO639 attribute which should give the > intended correspondence, of course. There is no ISO639 code for either XML or TeX. But now that I think about it, if such people are willing to stretch the meaning of "language", they probably won't mind (ab)using the private use tags ("x-") of 3066, and won't have much of a problem. From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 15:03:14 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:03:14 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> We seem to have dropped this thread a bit. I was getting the impression that the majority of council members do not accept the argument that P5 should have transitional features to aid migration. Is that a fair judgment, or should we have a show of (electronic) hands? If we _do_ say that P5 should go straight to xml:, it can be assumed that it will be possible to write a "teip4compat" module as and when needed; but that we don't need to decide now either a) how much compatibility, and b) how to own or maintain the beast. "A job delayed is a job done", as I always say. Sebastian From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 16:09:52 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:09:52 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Though related, I think these are two different issues. I am now reasonably persuaded that it is possible to make good arguments for going to both xml:id and xml:lang without further ado. Drafts need to be produced for the relevant pieces of P5 as soon as possible, so that Council may review them. It is one thing to agree in principle to an idea as sketched out e.g. in David's summary of the issues, but quite another to agree to its full ramifications when presented in Guidelines-style prose with examples and justifications. I am also reasonably well persuaded that there isn't any immediate need for TEI P4 compatability module, and unless anyone on Council wishes to argue otherwise, my intention is that we do not do so unless and until the idea surfaces again in the TEI community. (But mark my words -- it will). Sebastian Rahtz wrote: > We seem to have dropped this thread a bit. I was getting the impression > that > the majority of council members do not accept the argument that P5 > should have transitional features to aid migration. Is that a fair > judgment, > or should we have a show of (electronic) hands? > > If we _do_ say that P5 should go straight to xml:, it can be > assumed > that it will be possible to write a "teip4compat" module as and when > needed; > but that we don't need to decide now either a) how much compatibility, > and b) how to own or maintain the beast. "A job delayed is a job done", > as I always say. > > Sebastian > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 16:27:20 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:27:20 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A10838.9000706@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Lou Burnard wrote: > > I am now reasonably persuaded that it is possible to make good > arguments for going to both xml:id and xml:lang without further ado. > Drafts need to be produced for the relevant pieces of P5 as soon as > possible, so that Council may review them. It is one thing to agree in > principle to an idea as sketched out e.g. in David's summary of the > issues, but quite another to agree to its full ramifications when > presented in Guidelines-style prose with examples and justifications. Do we have the final proposal on what pointers should look like? is SOW-09 it? as I understand it, and vanish, and the "target" attribute of and points to a URL. Correct? And I assume this is part and parcel of the change to xml:id, or do we do them separately? -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 16:31:15 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:31:15 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A10923.6090608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> By the way, the current SOW=09 says, in aside sort of way: "In the current draft of P5, all addresses refer by means of XML IDs, making the processing of a single chapter at a time difficult. To make chapter-by chapter processing of the Guidelines easy, current IDREFs to a chapter of the Guidelines like the chapter on linking, referred to as SA, would be modified if they appeared in another file of the guidelines, so that: In section we introduced the simplest pointer elements, ptr and ref. would be replaced by a reference such as In section we introduced the simplest pointer elements, ptr and ref." This rather horrifies me, as it implies that the separate chapters are always separate documents, which will be presented separately. Either the Guidelines are a single document, or they are not. Whether you can process a chapter by itself for proofing purposes is a matter of internal hackery.... -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 21 17:58:58 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 07:58:58 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 Message-ID: Dear Council members, the TEI Technical COuncil will hold a telephone conference coming monday the 29th of November. I would like to collect agenda items for this meeting. Please send them either to me or to the list as soon as possible. As usual, the active WGs are expected to report on their progress. I would also like to ask the workgroups, especially SO, to point us to updated documents etc. to allow the council members to prepare for the discussion. There is a document from the Sanskrit taskforce (Lou: can you give us the URL please), which we will discuss; please read and comment on it. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 18:12:15 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou-at-home) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:12:15 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Christian Wittern wrote: > > There is a document from the Sanskrit taskforce (Lou: can you give us > the URL please), which we will discuss; please read and comment on it. > http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/CE/cew12.pdf (sorry for delay in posting this -- it got overlooked till Chris reminded me) Lou From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 21 18:34:26 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:34:26 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Its not clear whether this is to be in an entirely new module, or form part of an existing optional module. It looks to be as if the idea is for a module to replace an open-ended list of attribute values for /@type with closed lists; I am wondering how to do this in ODD, so can others confirm that this _is_ the proposal? sebastian From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sun Nov 21 18:47:44 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:47:44 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] P4 compatibility mode (was "Re: xml-colon-thing") In-Reply-To: <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16801.10528.584659.551046@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > We seem to have dropped this thread a bit. I was getting the > impression that the majority of council members do not accept the > argument that P5 should have transitional features to aid > migration. Is that a fair judgment, or should we have a show of > (electronic) hands? Remember that, for the ID/IDREF issue, SO has already proposed (and I think Council agreed to in principle in Ghent, but not explicitly as there were still questions on the IDREFS issue back then) that we provide a module that would allow use of ID/IDREF instead of XPointers. I could probably be persuaded that the "wait and see if anyone wants it" approach is the way to go, even on this issue. But I do think we want to keep it (an ID/IDREF module) in the backs of our minds, even if we don't create it right up front, and even if we don't create an entire "P4 compatibility mode" module. From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sun Nov 21 19:06:18 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:06:18 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > I am now reasonably persuaded that it is possible to make good > arguments for going to both xml:id and xml:lang without further > ado. Does that mean you believe that all the arguments CE and SO have put forth up to this point have not been good? I'm not sure I would consider the mere possibility of good arguments is sufficient, at least in the face of any good arguments against. > Drafts need to be produced for the relevant pieces of P5 as soon as > possible, so that Council may review them. It is one thing to agree > in principle to an idea as sketched out e.g. in David's summary of > the issues, but quite another to agree to its full ramifications > when presented in Guidelines-style prose with examples and > justifications. While your logic (that it's worth reading full idea fleshed out with examples etc) is sound, the conclusion (that P5 should be altered now) does not follow. * Changing P5 so that it refers to xml:id= is a bit of a deal, as all Sebastian's style-sheets need to be changed to match. * Changing P5 so that it uses XPointers to point to xml:id= instead of IDREFs is a really big deal, as all Sebastian's style-sheets need to be changed to match. * I don't see that there would be justifications in the Guidelines, anyway, so if we want more of that we need to ask for more working papers sort of things. * Changing P5 to do these things is itself a very significant change (e.g., dozens to hundreds of examples need to be changed; at least 10 chapters discuss pointing), so IMHO Council should be pretty sure of it first, before we devote serious time and effort to it. That said, until Baltimore, I thought we *were* pretty sure of this. I find this whole discussion a little dusty (as in "the dust never settles" :-). A few weeks before Baltimore the discussion (among you, me, & Sebastian) was not *should* we make this change, but *how* we should do it. Sebastian said he would not be ready to perform the needed changes to the style-sheets until at least December, at which time we either have to halt other production on P5 while these changes are made (my idea) or use Perforce to create a separate branch of P5 source and make the changes there, re-merging them when complete (Sebastian's idea). I realize this is a weird role-reversal (months ago I was the one chomping at the bit to change P5 to use XPointers, and first Lou, then Sebastian, were saying "whoa" :-), but I really have concerns about putting serious resources into this change unless we are quite convinced we want it in the end product. > I am also reasonably well persuaded that there isn't any > immediate need for TEI P4 compatability module, and unless anyone > on Council wishes to argue otherwise, my intention is that we do > not do so unless and until the idea surfaces again in the TEI > community. (But mark my words -- it will). Good. But if you really think it will surface (I'm not 100% sure I understand why it would -- perhaps you could recreate your chart of data vs tools you presented in Baltimore), we should keep it in the backs of our minds as we move forward, so as to not do anything that would arbitrarily make it difficult to do so. From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sun Nov 21 20:47:25 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:47:25 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A10838.9000706@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10838.9000706@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16801.17709.629944.963222@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > as I understand it, and vanish, and the "target" > attribute of and points to a URL. Correct? Well, sorta. The value of target= of and (as well as all the other IDREF attributes) will be a URI Reference, the fragment identifier of which (i.e., the part after the "#") uses the XPointer Framework[1]. > And I assume this is part and parcel of the change to xml:id, or > do we do them separately? I have always spoken of them and represented them as one and the same, but in truth they are entirely separable. If I understand correctly, neither one has any thwarting impact on the other. Notes ----- [1] With additional XPointer schemes available, the details of which Council *really* needs to read up on and either object to or approve ASAP. From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 21 21:15:18 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:15:18 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Sebastian Rahtz's message of "Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:34:26 +0000") References: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Sebastian Rahtz writes: > Its not clear whether this is to be in an entirely new module, or form > part of an existing > optional module. It looks to be as if the idea is for a module to > replace an open-ended > list of attribute values for /@type with closed lists; I am > wondering how to do this in ODD, > so can others confirm that this _is_ the proposal? Yes, the proposal is just to provide a list of suggested values for attributes, they do not want new tags anymore for themselves, but they do rely on . Which brings me to the question: What is the status of ? All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Mon Nov 22 00:40:09 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:40:09 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A10923.6090608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10923.6090608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16801.31673.617225.721577@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > By the way, the current SOW=09 says, in aside sort of way: ... I do not at the moment have an opinion on this one at all, let alone a strong one. So I'd like to understand the pros and cons on both sides. I am sure I understand the current problem: editing a single file of a multi-file document (like the Guidelines) is a big pain with XML IDs that point to another file. I agree with SOW09's point (David Durand's idea, I think, but might have been someone else's) that if one used a relative URI reference this would not be a problem. But I'm a bit confused ... since XML editing software doesn't typically validate bare name references, wouldn't using just a bare name avoid most the problems as well as using a relative URI reference would? E.g. > This rather horrifies me, as it implies that the separate > chapters are always separate documents, which will be presented > separately. I don't think it implies separate documents at all, let alone always. > Either the Guidelines are a single document, or they are not. Seems a little counter-intuitive to me -- why wouldn't the wave / particle dilemma apply? I think of the Guidelines as a single document, as I think most people do, but chapter 2 is even produced as a separate document. > Whether you can process a chapter by itself for proofing purposes > is a matter of internal hackery... I'm not sure what you mean by "internal hackery", but if it isn't tricks like using a relative URI reference ("./name#here") instead of a bare name ("#here"), what is it? From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Mon Nov 22 01:18:18 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:18:18 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > As usual, the active WGs are expected to report on their > progress. I would also like to ask the workgroups, especially SO, > to point us to updated documents etc. to allow the council > members to prepare for the discussion. Personally, I would really prefer we didn't bother with WG reports for WGs that haven't anything to report. (PB, SO, CE, MI jump to mind as likely candidates; of course the WG chairs would know better than I.) That will leave more time for other agenda items, about which I'll try to say more tomorrow. But if nothing else, I think Councilors should really read SO W 09 (http://www.tei-c.org[.uk]/Activities/SO/sow09.html) and ask enough questions on the list (and presumably get answers) before the call so that they can actually express a definitive opinion on this. It would also be really helpful (IMHO) if someone (perhaps David, David, or Sebastian?) were to post an example snippet of XSLT that would follow a bare name pointer. (I was shocked to find XSLT won't just do this on its own -- after all, XHTML uses href= with bare names all the time, doesn't it? There must be cook book examples of this, no?) From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Mon Nov 22 02:07:06 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:07:06 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16801.36890.687232.101801@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > It looks to be as if the idea is for a module to replace an > open-ended list of attribute values for /@type with closed > lists; I am wondering how to do this in ODD, Would it not be something like the following (doing this off top of head, so may not be well-formed, let alone valid)? a bird a bird's sound a bird's walk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 04:39:33 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:39:33 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1B3D5.6070309@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: >It would also be really helpful (IMHO) if someone (perhaps David, >David, or Sebastian?) were to post an example snippet of XSLT that >would follow a bare name pointer. > > what is a "bare name pointer", I wonder? you provide the example document, I'll show you the XSLT. Sebastian From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 06:22:22 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:22:22 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: > >* Changing P5 so that it refers to xml:id= is a bit of a deal, as all > Sebastian's style-sheets need to be changed to match. > > this has to be done regardless. I am now happy to bite the bullet >* Changing P5 so that it uses XPointers to point to xml:id= instead > of IDREFs is a really big deal, as all Sebastian's style-sheets > need to be changed to match. > > I suspect there are so few uses of IDREFS that it won't be that hard. >* Changing P5 to do these things is itself a very significant change > (e.g., dozens to hundreds of examples need to be changed; > thats automated, if the examples are done right > at least > 10 chapters discuss pointing), so IMHO Council should be pretty > sure of it first, before we devote serious time and effort to it. > > indeed. but the Council accepted the principle in Ghent, and asked for clarification in some areas, which has now been given. so I don't see any reason to delay a decision >Sebastian said he would not be ready to perform the needed changes to >the style-sheets until at least December, at which time we either have >to halt other production on P5 while these changes are made (my idea) >or use Perforce to create a separate branch of P5 source and make the >changes there, re-merging them when complete (Sebastian's idea). > > I'm ready to bring this forward a bit; I am also rather inclining to your view now, that we should close P5 for a week and do it in one big go. >we should keep it in the >backs of our minds as we move forward, so as to not do anything that >would arbitrarily make it difficult to do so. > > agreed. I do have a P4 compat module as one of the ODD test files, so I'd expect to roughly keep it in sync sebastian From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 06:25:19 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:25:19 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16801.17709.629944.963222@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10838.9000706@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.17709.629944.963222@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1CC9F.7000705@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: >[1] With additional XPointer schemes available, the details of which > Council *really* needs to read up on and either object to or approve > ASAP. > > I wonder. Since there are no uses of extended pointer in the Guidelines per se, we can switch the Guidelines document and its processing stylesheets now, and leave the additional schemes more fluid. They'll only affect the examples, for which we don't have any processing software. Sebastian From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 06:31:19 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:31:19 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16801.31673.617225.721577@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10923.6090608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.31673.617225.721577@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1CE07.3070505@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: >I am sure I understand the current problem: editing a single file of >a multi-file document (like the Guidelines) is a big pain with XML >IDs that point to another file. > > > they point to other places within the same document; that document _happens_ to be instantiated as several files on disk at present, but that is by no means set in stone. We could switch to a single XML file tomorrow if we felt like it. >I agree with SOW09's point (David Durand's idea, I think, but might >have been someone else's) that if one used a relative URI reference >this would not be a problem. > > but you can't use a relative URI. a URI points to another document. the other chapters are not other documents. >But I'm a bit confused ... since XML editing software doesn't >typically validate bare name references, wouldn't using just a bare >name avoid most the problems as well as using a relative URI >reference would? E.g. > > yes, thats what I assumed we would do > >Seems a little counter-intuitive to me -- why wouldn't the wave / >particle dilemma apply? > 'taint a dilemma for me :-} > I think of the Guidelines as a single >document, as I think most people do, but chapter 2 is even produced >as a separate document. > > no. a separate document can be produced which uses the same content as chapter 2. not the same thing.... >I'm not sure what you mean by "internal hackery", but if it isn't >tricks like using a relative URI reference ("./name#here") instead of >a bare name ("#here"), what is it? > > when you process chapter X which references #foo in chapter Y, you consult the eXist database to see which chapter #foo is in, and say "somewhere in chapter Y". sebastian From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 06:40:41 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:40:41 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16801.36890.687232.101801@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.36890.687232.101801@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1D039.2080909@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: > > > > > a bird > > > a bird's sound > > > a bird's walk > > > > > > as it stands, I don't think this works, because the change mode only works when you write a schema which loads the TEI and changes it. A module does not function like that. surely the intention is to limit the fixed list to s which occur inside , not all s? and there are two fixed lists, one for the first set and one for the second set of s? sebastian From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 07:07:48 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:07:48 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: References: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A1D694.7080708@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Christian Wittern wrote: >Yes, the proposal is just to provide a list of suggested values for >attributes, they do not want new tags anymore for themselves, but they >do rely on . > >Which brings me to the question: What is the status of ? > > > we could try to "pass" that next week, but I guess its waiting on a final writeup from (probably) Lou and James sebastian From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Nov 22 08:04:29 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:04:29 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> (Syd Bauman's message of "Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:18:18 -0500") References: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: Syd Bauman writes: >> As usual, the active WGs are expected to report on their >> progress. I would also like to ask the workgroups, especially SO, >> to point us to updated documents etc. to allow the council >> members to prepare for the discussion. > > Personally, I would really prefer we didn't bother with WG reports > for WGs that haven't anything to report. (PB, SO, CE, MI jump to mind > as likely candidates; of course the WG chairs would know better than > I.) I see your point. On the other hand, one of the purpose of these calls is to provide the WG's with deadlines that spur them into activity. No reports = no deadlines = no activity. But I agree that to have this play out better, an earlier reminder for the call would be necessary. CE is not active any more, BTW. > That will leave more time for other agenda items, about which > I'll try to say more tomorrow. But if nothing else, I think > Councilors should really read SO W 09 > (http://www.tei-c.org[.uk]/Activities/SO/sow09.html) and ask enough > questions on the list (and presumably get answers) before the call so > that they can actually express a definitive opinion on this. Please do so! All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 08:05:00 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:05:00 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: References: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A1E3FC.8070005@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Christian Wittern wrote: >CE is not active any more, BTW. > > unfortunately, not all of its recommendations have been implemented :-} Sebastian From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Nov 22 08:13:51 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:13:51 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Sebastian Rahtz's message of "Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:22:22 +0000") References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Sebastian Rahtz writes: > Syd Bauman wrote: > >> >>* Changing P5 so that it refers to xml:id= is a bit of a deal, as all >> Sebastian's style-sheets need to be changed to match. >> >> > this has to be done regardless. I am now happy to bite the > bullet > >>* Changing P5 so that it uses XPointers to point to xml:id= instead >> of IDREFs is a really big deal, as all Sebastian's style-sheets >> need to be changed to match. >> >> > I suspect there are so few uses of IDREFS that it won't be that > hard. > >>* Changing P5 to do these things is itself a very significant change >> (e.g., dozens to hundreds of examples need to be changed; >> > thats automated, if the examples are done right > >> at least >> 10 chapters discuss pointing), so IMHO Council should be pretty >> sure of it first, before we devote serious time and effort to it. >> >> > indeed. but the Council accepted the principle in Ghent, > and asked for clarification in some areas, which has now been > given. so I don't see any reason to delay a decision I hope we can come to a decision at the next call. This requires that everybody is up to date on the problem. To ensure this is the case, the best would be to point us to a clear document (SOW09?) where we can find it all lined out. >>Sebastian said he would not be ready to perform the needed changes to >>the style-sheets until at least December, at which time we either have >>to halt other production on P5 while these changes are made (my idea) >>or use Perforce to create a separate branch of P5 source and make the >>changes there, re-merging them when complete (Sebastian's idea). We have been discussing these style-sheets on-and-off as if they were part of P5, which they are not. At the moment they are not even officially "TEI-branded", they are just hacked together by Sebastian, who happens to do a lot of other work for the TEI. We definetely should give some thought to the status of these style-sheets and the way how they work now. In that context, we should consider whether we want to devote some effort to a considerable overhaul of the design, document for example how they pick up certain @rend values (and work magically with lots of attributes the Guidelines do not even now off), through in different (dare I say, foreing) namespaces. If we do deem they important for the TEI project, we need to do something about that. I'd like to put this on the agenda if nobody convinces me otherwise. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 08:20:22 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:20:22 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A1E796.20208@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Christian Wittern wrote: >We have been discussing these style-sheets on-and-off as if they were >part of P5, which they are not. At the moment they are not even >officially "TEI-branded", they are just hacked together by Sebastian, > > This is not entirely true. "The stylesheets" refers to both the general set I maintain, and also the ones which are needed to make P5 work (which were paid for by the NEH). Syd refers to the latter - we need to fix "the stylesheets" now because they turn P5 ODDs into HTML and PDF, as well as any future job on general P5 documents. the changes are not a big deal, just fiddly, needing concentration over a couple of days. >I'd like to put this on the agenda if nobody convinces me otherwise. > > > If you can make it more specific than "what we shall we do about it", it would help. A specific proposal would be useful. Sebastian From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Mon Nov 22 14:17:43 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:17:43 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A1B3D5.6070309@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1B3D5.6070309@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16802.15191.479589.181646@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > what is a "bare name pointer", I wonder? you provide the > example document, I'll show you the XSLT. is a bare name pointer that points over . From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Mon Nov 22 14:31:07 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:31:07 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16802.15995.327189.209887@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > >* Changing P5 so that it refers to xml:id= is a bit of a deal, as > > all Sebastian's style-sheets need to be changed to match. > this has to be done regardless. I am now happy to bite the > bullet Excellent. We'll talk off-list about when. > I suspect there are so few uses of IDREFS that it won't be that > hard. (That was "IDREFs", not "IDREFS" ... I hope we're not talking cross-purposes.) I'll bet you're right, there are probably very few uses of IDREF in the Guidelines except for and , and perhaps an occasional . I don't even think we use target= of . But I could swear you had said it was important (for a variety of reasons, not the least of which would be your sanity) to alter the stylesheets all at once, not just the needed-for-Guidelines set. In which case you need to change the processing of every single IDREF or IDREFS attribute. > thats automated, if the examples are done right May be true, but it doesn't change the fact that it's still quite a lot of work. Besides, our experience with P4 demonstrates that examples need to be eyed by a human even if auto-validated. > I'm ready to bring this forward a bit; I am also rather inclining > to your view now, that we should close P5 for a week and do it in > one big go. Either way. But if we do the "close for a week" method, we need to take a "snapshot" before we start messing around, to make backing out easy if something goes wrong. From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Mon Nov 22 14:48:14 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:48:14 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A1CC9F.7000705@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10838.9000706@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.17709.629944.963222@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CC9F.7000705@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16802.17022.211577.126327@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > I wonder. Since there are no uses of extended pointer in the > Guidelines per se, we can switch the Guidelines document and its > processing stylesheets now, and leave the additional schemes more > fluid. They'll only affect the examples, for which we don't have > any processing software. Errr... ahhh... yes. (I'm hemming and hawing because I think we've already had this conversation.) Your position, I think, ... well, now that I think about it, I'm not sure what your position was. I had initially proposed that the style-sheets need only be able to do what P4 does, i.e., handle bare names, and only for those elements and attributes the Guidelines actually use. You pointed out the need to do all elements & attributes at the same time. I quickly realized that the consequence of this is that my "bare name only" idea was stupid, because the new style-sheets also need to handle what P4 does. Never mind. The point is you're correct, there's no need for you to feel compelled to process any of the TEI additional XPointer schemes. At the moment I don't see a need for you to even think about anything other than a URI Reference with a bare name as the fragment identifier (e.g., "http://standard/kinda/url#name"), and we might even be able to get away without the URI part of that (e.g. just "#name"). From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Mon Nov 22 15:00:44 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:00:44 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A1CE07.3070505@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10923.6090608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.31673.617225.721577@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CE07.3070505@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16802.17772.942439.650789@cushing.cis.brown.edu> I see both sides of this coin. * Why would one want to need an eXist database to do something so simple? Seems almost ridiculous. * On the other hand, pointers like "#duck" say exactly what they mean, whereas pointers like "../pond.xml#duck" references the file structure, which is an artificial hierarchy and naming system imposed upon the document, and could change willy-nilly. So personally, I'm undecided but leaning towards "#duck". That said ... > but you can't use a relative URI. a URI points to another > document. the other chapters are not other documents. This doesn't make sense to me (prima facie becuas "#duck" *is* a relative URI, but I think we both mean a spelled-out relative URI). If I am editing the file /home/syd/music_discussion.xml why can't I specify Like everyone, I have too many Beatles albums. When I finally cleaned house, I found 3 copies of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band. ?? From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 15:52:19 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:52:19 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16802.15191.479589.181646@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1B3D5.6070309@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16802.15191.479589.181646@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A25183.4030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: >>what is a "bare name pointer", I wonder? you provide the >>example document, I'll show you the XSLT. >> >> > > is a bare name pointer that points over xml:id="that"/>. target="http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html#id67420."/> > > > so what's the issue with a stylesheet to process this? ... .... -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 15:56:37 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:56:37 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16802.15995.327189.209887@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16802.15995.327189.209887@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A25285.7040101@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: > >(That was "IDREFs", not "IDREFS" ... I hope we're not talking >cross-purposes.) > oh, OK. either way, vanishingly few >. But I could swear you had said it was important (for a >variety of reasons, not the least of which would be your sanity) to >alter the stylesheets all at once, not just the needed-for-Guidelines >set. In which case you need to change the processing of every single >IDREF or IDREFS attribute. > > > i wonder if I currently allow for IDREFs :-} >May be true, but it doesn't change the fact that it's still quite a >lot of work. Besides, our experience with P4 demonstrates that >examples need to be eyed by a human even if auto-validated. > > > but we never formally validated the examples in P4 in situ, did we >Either way. But if we do the "close for a week" method, we need to >take a "snapshot" before we start messing around, to make backing out >easy if something goes wrong. > > I'l think you find we use a version control system which looks after this for us :-} -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 16:02:21 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:02:21 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16802.17772.942439.650789@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10923.6090608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.31673.617225.721577@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CE07.3070505@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16802.17772.942439.650789@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A253DD.6030401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: >* Why would one want to need an eXist database to do something so > simple? Seems almost ridiculous. > > > because its being used already so extensively in the ODD processing, its free >* On the other hand, pointers like "#duck" say exactly what they > mean, whereas pointers like "../pond.xml#duck" references the file > structure, which is an artificial hierarchy and naming system > imposed upon the document, and could change willy-nilly. > > absolutely right. this would be untenable. over dead bodies, etc >why can't I specify > > Like everyone, I have too many Beatles > albums. > > When I finally cleaned > house, I found 3 copies of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts > Club Band. > >?? > > you can, if you want. I dont recommend it tho....:-} -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 16:02:48 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:02:48 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16802.17772.942439.650789@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10923.6090608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.31673.617225.721577@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CE07.3070505@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16802.17772.942439.650789@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A253F8.50302@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: >* Why would one want to need an eXist database to do something so > simple? Seems almost ridiculous. > > > because its being used already so extensively in the ODD processing, its free >* On the other hand, pointers like "#duck" say exactly what they > mean, whereas pointers like "../pond.xml#duck" references the file > structure, which is an artificial hierarchy and naming system > imposed upon the document, and could change willy-nilly. > > absolutely right. this would be untenable. over dead bodies, etc >why can't I specify > > Like everyone, I have too many Beatles > albums. > > I dont, actually! > > When I finally cleaned > house, I found 3 copies of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts > Club Band. > >?? > > you can, if you want. I dont recommend it tho....:-} -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 22 17:56:28 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:56:28 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Re: choice In-Reply-To: References: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A26E9C.601@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Christian Wittern wrote: > Which brings me to the question: What is the status of ? > A good question! Here's my attempt at an answer. Anyone interested in the history of the discussion can of course read it by going to the tei-choice list archive, readily accessible from the tei sourceforge site (go to http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=41178) The most recent posting was a useful summary of various possible approaches to an implementation which Syd produced in September. For those who don't want to wade through the sourceforge archive, I've also placed this on the TEI website at http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/Choice/summary.txt Since that discussion, I've started (but not finished) some tidying up of the text of the part of P5 where is first introduced: there is an XML version of this at http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/Choice/choice.xml, but it has not yet been integrated into the main P5 source tree. The tidying up led me to some further rethinking of what we should be recommending for this element, on which I would appreciate comments from the Council. The main issue remains: what should the content model of be. We started with a fairly complex structure designed to mimic only the functionality of the janus-tags , etc. I then suggested it might be good to generalize this to support other, more possible kinds of parallel readings, e.g. a passage might be marked as unclear, with both a regularized form, and a corrected form, and that we could do this with a content model using two classes, rather than two explicit elements. I proposed originally a class "tei.sic" for readings that seemed to be based on what the text "says", and another class "tei.corr" for what the text "ought to say", with the suggestion that the model might be (tei.sic, tei.corr+) Thinking about this again I would like to propose that the model should be loosened still further, to something like (tei.choosable, tei.choosable+). There are definitely some elements ( as John Smith's group have proposed) which would need to be members of both tei.sic and tei.corr, which would lead to a non-deterministic content model if we adopted my earlier suggestion. More to the point, I am increasingly uncomfortable with the distinction between what the text "says" what it "ought to say". So, my view now (which I will also post to the TEI-choice list for comment) is that we ought to allow for 2 or more elements from the "tei.choosable" class inside and leave it at that. The members of that class are up for grabs, but my current preferred list would be , , , , and only. Oh, and , of course. Syd made the interesting comment that it was hard to distinguish (in a non-janus world) between and , which the more I think about it, the more I agree with, which is why is not on the list above. I see less and less use for this element. I haven't included and in the list, because I cannot think of any real situation in which they would be "choosable" -- either there is an addition/deletion in the text or there isn't. If you wanted to indicate that one way of interpreting e.g. an addition was by some regularization or other, then I think you should wrap the addition within a sic, like this 1st first For a given application, of course, people may well want to constrain the choosable elements, or add others to them. But the basic out-of-the-box element, I suggest, need not be any more complex than this. From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Nov 22 18:40:35 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 08:40:35 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A1E796.20208@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Sebastian Rahtz's message of "Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:20:22 +0000") References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A1E796.20208@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Sebastian Rahtz writes: > Christian Wittern wrote: > >>We have been discussing these style-sheets on-and-off as if they were >>part of P5, which they are not. At the moment they are not even >>officially "TEI-branded", they are just hacked together by Sebastian, >> >> > This is not entirely true. "The stylesheets" refers to both > the general set I maintain, and also the ones which are needed > to make P5 work (which were paid for by the NEH). Syd > refers to the latter - we need to fix "the stylesheets" now > because they turn P5 ODDs into HTML and PDF, as well > as any future job on general P5 documents. > > the changes are not a big deal, just fiddly, needing > concentration over a couple of days. Ah sorry, my fault. I was talking, as you know, about those publicly visible on the tei-c website. > >>I'd like to put this on the agenda if nobody convinces me otherwise. >> >> >> > If you can make it more specific than "what we shall we do about it", > it would help. A specific proposal would be useful. The first point to discuss would be if the Council thinks work in this area needs to be done and should be charged by the Council. If yes, we need to think about a timeline, details of work to be done, find people to do the work etc. This is no small job, so we need to think carefully about it. At the moment, I think the first part is what we need to decide soon, the other follows then. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Nov 22 18:51:59 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 08:51:59 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Re: choice In-Reply-To: <41A26E9C.601@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Lou Burnard's message of "Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:56:28 +0000") References: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A26E9C.601@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Lou Burnard writes: > Christian Wittern wrote: > > >> Which brings me to the question: What is the status of ? >> > > A good question! Here's my attempt at an answer. Anyone interested in > the history of the discussion can of course read it by going to the > tei-choice list archive, readily accessible from the tei sourceforge > site (go to http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=41178) > The most recent posting was a useful summary of various possible > approaches to an implementation which Syd produced in September. For > those who don't want to wade through the sourceforge archive, I've also > placed this on the TEI website at > http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/Choice/summary.txt Thank you. I spend a few hours on that sf archive in early September and did not want to repeat that experience... > > So, my view now (which I will also post to the TEI-choice list for > comment) is that we ought to allow for 2 or more elements from the > "tei.choosable" class inside and leave it at that. The members > of that class are up for grabs, but my current preferred list would be > , , , , and only. Oh, and , of > course. > ... > > 1st > first > > > For a given application, of course, people may well want to constrain > the choosable elements, or add others to them. But the basic > out-of-the-box element, I suggest, need not be any more complex than this. Looks good to me. I assume that choice can have more than 2 direct children. I wonder however, how would an encoder specify paths through these choices -- this seems to be especially a problem for children that do not carry semantic bagagge, like . Can we say something about how we use them in the header? All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Tue Nov 23 04:02:33 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 09:02:33 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A1E796.20208@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41A2FCA9.1040901@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Christian Wittern wrote: >Ah sorry, my fault. I was talking, as you know, about those publicly >visible on the tei-c website. > > > those are due to be phased out in favour of Sourceforge soon, I hope. >The first point to discuss would be if the Council thinks work in this >area needs to be done and should be charged by the Council. > definitely worth discussion > If yes, >we need to think about a timeline, details of work to be done, find >people to do the work etc. This is no small job, so we need to think >carefully about it. > > indeed. if we decide to charter a work group in some way, it would be a new direction to take. Sebastian From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Tue Nov 23 14:40:18 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:40:18 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A1D039.2080909@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41A120CF.1040608@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A12602.2080805@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.36890.687232.101801@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1D039.2080909@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16803.37410.132780.340854@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > as it stands, I don't think this works, because the change mode > only works when you write a schema which loads the TEI and > changes it. A module does not function like that. Oh. > surely the intention is to limit the fixed list to s which > occur inside , not all s? and there are two fixed > lists, one for the first set and one for the second set of > s? Indeed, this screams for at least co-occurrence constraints, if not Schematron constraints, doesn't it? From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Tue Nov 23 23:22:16 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:22:16 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16804.3192.611604.972846@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > I hope we can come to a decision at the next call. This requires > that everybody is up to date on the problem. To ensure this is > the case, the best would be to point us to a clear document > (SOW09?) where we can find it all lined out. Yes, this is pretty much laid out completely in SO W 09 (http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/SO/sow09.html). While I don't think the document is perfect, it is the starting point. I think Councilors should be reading it carefully *now*, not Sun night, so that questions can be raised before the call. From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Wed Nov 24 07:20:20 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:20:20 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] new members participation Message-ID: <16804.31876.444081.928188@cushing.cis.brown.edu> BTW, the new members (James and John, I think) are welcome to participate in the upcoming conference call. The Board is still reviewing the operating procedures document, so it has not been published publiclly yet. It says, at the end of section 1.6: Newly elected Board and Council members take office on January 1 following the election. They are added to e-mail lists immediately following the election, and are permitted to participate in conference calls at TEI expense between their election and January 1. They are also permitted to attend face-to-face meetings during that time but will not be reimbursed for expenses. From nsmith at email.unc.edu Wed Nov 24 09:43:15 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:43:15 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16804.3192.611604.972846@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: > I think Councilors > should be reading it carefully *now*, not Sun night, so that > questions can be raised before the call. yes, you are right, it would be physically impossible to catch up at once with all the threads bursting on the list recently. i was following them diligently, but missed a few "turns". could anybody let me know how to get to the list archive? best, ns > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Wed Nov 24 10:26:49 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:26:49 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: References: <16804.3192.611604.972846@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <16804.43065.54911.386349@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > could anybody let me know how to get to the list archive? http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Nov 24 17:50:33 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:50:33 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16804.43065.54911.386349@cushing.cis.brown.edu> (Syd Bauman's message of "Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:26:49 -0500") References: <16804.3192.611604.972846@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <16804.43065.54911.386349@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: Syd Bauman writes: >> could anybody let me know how to get to the list archive? > > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > It appears that the list archvie changed the access procedures. I for one could not get in, there is now a password required. Could we please be informed about the required procedure? All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Wed Nov 24 22:56:01 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:56:01 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: References: <16804.3192.611604.972846@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <16804.43065.54911.386349@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <16805.22481.474202.503538@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Disclaimer: I don't run this list, have no true knowledge of how it works, and don't recall ever having looked at the archives before. > Could we please be informed about the required procedure? I did the following. * Went to http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council, scrolled to the bottom, entered my e-mail address into the bottom text entry field and clicked the "Unsubscribe or edit options" button next to it. * Scrolled to bottom of page, clicked on "Remind". * Waited a while -- took > 30s for e-mail with password to arrive. * Entered my password and changed some of my settings. * Went back to http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council, clicked on first link "tei-council archives". * Yay! From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Nov 24 23:21:53 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:21:53 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> (Syd Bauman's message of "Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:18:18 -0500") References: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: Syd Bauman writes: >> As usual, the active WGs are expected to report on their >> progress. I would also like to ask the workgroups, especially SO, >> to point us to updated documents etc. to allow the council >> members to prepare for the discussion. > > Personally, I would really prefer we didn't bother with WG reports > for WGs that haven't anything to report. (PB, SO, CE, MI jump to mind > as likely candidates; of course the WG chairs would know better than > I.) having thought about that a little more, I would like to ask the chairs of active workgroups to send us a short (1,2 paragraph) report on recent developments/activities here to this lists prior to the meeting (preferably until Friday). We can than discuss this where necessary on Monday and can use the time on the call more efficiently All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From nsmith at email.unc.edu Wed Nov 24 23:27:17 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:27:17 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing References: <16804.3192.611604.972846@cushing.cis.brown.edu><16804.43065.54911.386349@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <16805.22481.474202.503538@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <002b01c4d2a7$0ca5f270$6501a8c0@lib.unc.edu> thank you! I wanted first apologize for all the trouble, but then changed my mind - i think it's quite useful, plus... i like archives. best, ns P.S. more seriously - Syd, your help much appreciated. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Syd Bauman" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 10:56 PM Subject: Re: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing > Disclaimer: I don't run this list, have no true knowledge of how it > works, and don't recall ever having looked at the > archives before. > > > > Could we please be informed about the required procedure? > > I did the following. > > * Went to > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council, > scrolled to the bottom, entered my e-mail address into the bottom > text entry field and clicked the "Unsubscribe or edit options" > button next to it. > > * Scrolled to bottom of page, clicked on "Remind". > > * Waited a while -- took > 30s for e-mail with password to > arrive. > > * Entered my password and changed some of my settings. > > * Went back to > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council, > clicked on first link "tei-council archives". > > * Yay! > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Nov 24 23:49:12 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:49:12 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] TEI Council telephone conference on Monday, Nov 29th, 2004 at 1300 UTC Message-ID: TEI Council Members and Editors: This is the agenda for the conference call the TEI Council will hold later this coming Monday, Nov 29th, 2004 at 1300 UTC. Please read through the following, in advance of the call. INSTRUCTIONS for conference call: US participants can dial a toll-free number: 1-800-565-9881 Once you're connected, dial 239046# and you should be connected shortly. Participants from outside the US will have to make a long-distance call to the US: +1 416 695 7870 and then follow the same instructions. Expected members to participate: Syd Bauman, Alejandro Bia, David Birnbaum, Lou Burnard, Matthew Driscoll, David Durand, Julia Flanders, Sebastian Rahtz, Laurent Romary, Natasha Smith, Susan Schreibman, Edward Vanhoutte, Perry Willett, Christian Wittern. Welcome to participate are also James Cummings and John Walsh Agenda: 8 items, not more than 15 minutes apiece. ----------------------------------------------------- 1) Review of the minutes from the call of Sep. 20th (10 min) Minutes of the meeting are at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html. Review of action items, progress. 2) Short report from the MM2004 (5 min, Lou Burnard) ----------------------------------------------------- 3) Sanskrit taskforce report (10 min): Please read http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/CE/cew12.pdf ----------------------------------------------------- 4) Rollcall on the active WGs (15 min) : Standoff (SOW09), Manuscripts, Feature Structures, Physical Bibliography, Meta Language ----------------------------------------------------- 5) xml-colon-thing (15 min) How should xml:id, xml:lang be handled? See the discussion on tei-council in the last weeks. ----------------------------------------------------- 6) Development of stylesheets What role do the stylesheets Sebastian is currently maintaining play for the TEI? Should the TEI charge an effort for revising them? For creating documentation? Should some of the practice (values for @rend, table formatting, new attributes ) be integrated into the Guidelines? and similar questions should be considered. ----------------------------------------------------- 7) Other business (5 minutes) TBA 8) Meetings: (5 minutes) Council meeting next year ? when, where -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Nov 24 23:56:50 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:56:50 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <16805.22481.474202.503538@cushing.cis.brown.edu> (Syd Bauman's message of "Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:56:01 -0500") References: <16804.3192.611604.972846@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <16804.43065.54911.386349@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <16805.22481.474202.503538@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: Syd Bauman writes: > Disclaimer: I don't run this list, have no true knowledge of how it > works, and don't recall ever having looked at the > archives before. > Thanks Syd. I had looked at the archives before, but at some point in April, they stopped working. Now we have them again, at least for the period from August to now. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Thu Nov 25 11:47:35 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:47:35 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: References: <16804.3192.611604.972846@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <16804.43065.54911.386349@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <16805.22481.474202.503538@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <16806.3239.946187.392030@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > Thanks Syd. I had looked at the archives before, but at some point > in April, they stopped working. Now we have them again, at least > for the period from August to now. Indeed. I'll write to Daniel and see what, if anything, can be done about the previous archives. From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Fri Nov 26 19:16:28 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:16:28 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda Message-ID: Dear Councillors, Syd sent me an additional agenda item, please look at the document. I will send a revised agenda out in time before the meeting. > Lou and I would like to add a discussion of bibliographic > entries. The main discussion is currently at > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/download.php?group_id=106328&atid=644065&file_id=98435&aid=1012350, > but I hope to have a slightly condensed, slightly easier-to-read > version available soon. Document is now at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.html http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.xml All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Laurent.Romary at loria.fr Sat Nov 27 02:35:57 2004 From: Laurent.Romary at loria.fr (Laurent Romary) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:35:57 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, As I will not be able to attend to conference call (another meeting planned in Sarrebrucken at that time), I quickly give my view on this topic: - I have a strong intuition that the proposal based on biblItem is a good direction to go (a lot of things are made clearer) - I do not see why there is a need for relatedBiblItem, where a recursive biblItem (together with the attributes that are contemplated) would do the trick, it seems. My main arguments are: * design simplicity: why two objects with nearly the same semantics should be so much differentiated * practicality and coherence: if the relatedBiblItem objects are described elsewhere in the same or another document, then they are likely to be described as biblItem. They would thus change nature depending on whether a reference to them is made in an inline way (relatedBiblItem) or stand-off way (biblItem) Best Laurent Le 27 nov. 04, ? 01:16, Christian Wittern a ?crit : > > Dear Councillors, > > Syd sent me an additional agenda item, please look at the document. I > will send a revised agenda out in time before the meeting. > > >> Lou and I would like to add a discussion of bibliographic >> entries. The main discussion is currently at >> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/download.php? >> group_id=106328&atid=644065&file_id=98435&aid=1012350, >> but I hope to have a slightly condensed, slightly easier-to-read >> version available soon. > > Document is now at > http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.html > http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.xml > > > All the best, > > Christian > > -- > > Christian Wittern > Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University > 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sat Nov 27 11:54:38 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 11:54:38 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16808.45390.926712.252510@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > As I will not be able to attend to conference call ... Very sorry you won't make it. Note: I will try to cross-post the following to Sourceforge, as the bibliographic folks who wrote this paper can't read this list. > - I have a strong intuition that the proposal based on biblItem is a > good direction to go (a lot of things are made clearer) I think I agree, but I'm not at all clear on how structured the content of is supposed to be, and thus one whether it should replace the current , and if so should it be called or . > - I do not see why there is a need for relatedBiblItem, where a > recursive biblItem (together with the attributes that are > contemplated) would do the trick, it seems. Even in those situations where the is not nested within the to which it's related, isn't the target= attribute (which perhaps should be called related=) on sufficient to show this relationship? > My main arguments are: > * design simplicity: why two objects with nearly the same semantics > should be so much differentiated > * practicality and coherence: if the relatedBiblItem objects are > described elsewhere in the same or another document, then they are > likely to be described as biblItem. They would thus change nature > depending on whether a reference to them is made in an inline way > (relatedBiblItem) or stand-off way (biblItem) From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sat Nov 27 14:56:19 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 14:56:19 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A25183.4030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1B3D5.6070309@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16802.15191.479589.181646@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A25183.4030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16808.56291.675413.858516@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > ... > > > select="key('IDS',substring-after(@target,'#'))" mode="xref"/> > > .... Sorry, my XSLT just isn't that good. Some things I don't understand. The test here checks that the first character of the value of the target= attribute is "#". Is that sufficient? We haven't agreed on the details yet, but the suggestion was that target= be declared as either xsd:anyURI # for P4 IDREF or list { xsd:anyURI+ } # for P4 IDREFS Will a conforming processor have already handled whitespace issues? Although I found no prose to that effect, if I read the schema provided in XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes correctly, it should, at least for xsd:anyURI. (Search for the string "anyURI.whitespace".) I realize I didn't ask for sample code to handle the new version of IDREFS, but I am a bit concerned about leading & trailing whitespace for a RelaxNG list. The book doesn't really say either way. I suppose it's worth a tiny test, and we can at least see what particular processors do. Perhaps I'll try to whip one up later today. select="key('IDS',substring-after(@target,'#'))" mode="xref" Here I'm a bit lost. The first line selects all nodes for which the IDS key matches the value of target= after the "#". So supposedly somewhere there's some code to set the key for each element to its xml:id= value, right? I'm guessing the mode=xref business tells XSLT which of several possible modes to use when processing the templates that are selected -- I'm guessing that if no 'xref' mode is defined for a template that is selected, nothing happens. Maybe I should ask for a more specific example. We have a drama encoded as follows. P4 -- Colonel Juan Peron Col. P. ... P5 -- Colonel Juan Peron Col. P. ... In both cases we want to ignore elements and precede each element with [content of correct here]: How much more complicated is the P5 code than the P4 code? (I realize that if users start doing things like who="ftp://my.project.server/authLists/dramaRoles.xml#jp", or who="https://my.project.server/authList.xml#xpath(//div[@type='roles']/div[@n='Evita']/role[7]) that processing will be much more complicated. But the fact that processing for new functionality may not be easy doesn't give me hives they way that my concern that processing what used to be easy (the Col. Peron case, above) will become hard does.) From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 08:10:29 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:10:29 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16808.56291.675413.858516@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1B3D5.6070309@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16802.15191.479589.181646@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A25183.4030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16808.56291.675413.858516@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A9CE45.4060702@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: > >Sorry, my XSLT just isn't that good. Some things I don't understand. > > > >The test here checks that the first character of the value >of the target= attribute is "#". Is that sufficient? We haven't >agreed on the details yet, but the suggestion was that target= be >declared as either > xsd:anyURI # for P4 IDREF >or > list { xsd:anyURI+ } # for P4 IDREFS >Will a conforming processor have already handled whitespace issues? > > > oh, sorry, I didn't realize you meant you needed a solution to handle multiple targets. handling space-separated targets would need a call to (extension function) exslt:tokenize, or wait for XSLT2 but thats the same as it is now, isn't it? if XSLT has some special code for handling IDREFS, I at least have never used it. Though I suspect my stylesheets have never had to handle IDREFS anyway. >I realize I didn't ask for sample code to handle the new version of >IDREFS, but I am a bit concerned about leading & trailing whitespace >for a RelaxNG list. > > a quick "normalize-space()" around the @target should clear that up > select="key('IDS',substring-after(@target,'#'))" > mode="xref" > >Here I'm a bit lost. The first line selects all nodes for which the >IDS key matches the value of target= after the "#". > yup. >So supposedly >somewhere there's some code to set the key for each element to its >xml:id= value, right? > >I'm guessing the mode=xref business tells XSLT >which of several possible modes to use when processing the templates >that are selected -- I'm guessing that if no 'xref' mode is defined >for a template that is selected, nothing happens. > > no; if no mode is defined, it uses default rules (which isn't what you want). so you have a fallback which returns a way of getting to any particular element (it may return an error code, of course). > > > Colonel Juan Peron > > > > > Col. P. > ... > > > >In both cases we want to ignore elements and precede each > element with > [content of correct here]: > > > (untested) apart from the substring-after thing, this is exactly what I'd have done for P4 too. but wasn't this all discussed in SO? when you agreed on the syntax, you must have had some ideas of the algorithms for processing it? -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 10:10:27 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:10:27 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <16808.56291.675413.858516@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1B3D5.6070309@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16802.15191.479589.181646@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A25183.4030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16808.56291.675413.858516@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41A9EA63.60600@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: >I realize I didn't ask for sample code to handle the new version of >IDREFS, but I am a bit concerned about leading & trailing whitespace >for a RelaxNG list. target="http://books.xmlschemata.org/relaxng/ch09s09.html">The >book doesn't really say either way. > by the way, remember that the Relax NG processor is orthogonal. The fact that the schema says "a b c " is a "list" has no impact on XSLT processing. To the XML parser "a b c" is "a b c", no more no less. A processor might read the schema to assist in the processing, but the XML parser won't be offering help. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 12:29:32 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:29:32 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41AA0AFC.5080205@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Laurent Romary wrote: > - I do not see why there is a need for relatedBiblItem, where a > recursive biblItem (together with the attributes that are > contemplated) would do the trick, it seems. My main I agree with this, after an admittedly fairly quick read. seems unnecessary. I'd also like to see the use of the target attribute spelt out in examples. do I say Thaller, Manfred A Draft Proposal for a Standard for the Coding of Machine Readable Sources ? though in that case it isn't clear why I would not use In general, I think that this sort of proposal is a good way to go, but it looks premature for a Council decision now. It's such a complicated area, where interchange and compatibility is even more important than usual. I want to see concrete proof of interchange, to ensure (for example) that the work being done in OpenOffice is compatible. I also wonder, naturally, whether the TEI should be working in this area of structured bibliographies. We could just suggest that people code stuff in the MODS namespace. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk do From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sun Nov 28 13:06:16 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:06:16 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] TEI Council telephone conference on Monday, Nov 29th, 2004 at 1300 UTC In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16810.5016.577412.894677@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > ... conference call the TEI Council will hold ... this coming > Monday, Nov 29th, 2004 at 1300 UTC. For local times, see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?year=2004&month=11&day=29&hour=13&min=0&sec=0 From david.durand at ingenta.com Sun Nov 28 13:36:26 2004 From: david.durand at ingenta.com (David G. Durand) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:36:26 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] ** conference call instructions have changed ** Message-ID: <69ABDF16-416C-11D9-A148-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> This is the same as the last call, but not the same as the instructions Christian just posted! Ingenta has changed their conference calling service to one that reduces the cost to European participants. The new instructions are as follows: Call the conferencing service: US (toll free): 1-866-722 8225 UK (toll-free): 0800 953 1275 Other International callers must call a regular UK number: +44 1452 555 499 Should you want to call the toll number from within the UK, you would dial: (0) 1452 555 499 when you are connected enter a PIN number: 520522# It then asks you to state your name followed by a #. This announces you to the list, and is probably worth doing. --------- _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council David G. Durand Director, Electronic Publishing Services Ingenta Inc. 111R Chestnut St. Providence, RI 02903 USA T: +1 401-331-2014 x111 T: +1 401-935-5317 Mobile E: david.durand at ingenta.com From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sun Nov 28 13:54:57 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:54:57 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Conference call Nov. 29 In-Reply-To: <41A9EA63.60600@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <16801.33962.36287.189629@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1B3D5.6070309@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16802.15191.479589.181646@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A25183.4030704@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16808.56291.675413.858516@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A9EA63.60600@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16810.7937.79731.691508@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > oh, sorry, I didn't realize you meant you needed a solution to handle > multiple targets. No apologies -- you were right not to realize it, it wasn't really part of the original request. :-) > but thats the same as it [handling IDREFS with exslt or waiting for > XSLT2] is now, isn't it? I think so, but I'm not sure. (Which is why I'm asking.) > a quick "normalize-space()" around the @target should clear that up Ah, OK. Thanks. > OK, thanks. > no; if no mode is defined, it uses default rules (which isn't > what you want). so you have a fallback > OK, thanks. > apart from the substring-after thing, this is exactly what I'd > have done for P4 too. Roger, that's the information I was looking for. Thanks. > but wasn't this all discussed in SO? when you agreed on the > syntax, you must have had some ideas of the algorithms for > processing it? Yes and no. Let's discuss it over a beer (orange Fanta :-) someday. > by the way, remember that the Relax NG processor is orthogonal. The > fact that the schema says "a b c " is a "list" has no impact on > XSLT processing. To the XML parser "a b c" is "a b c", no more no > less. A processor might read the schema to assist in the > processing, but the XML parser won't be offering help. Right, good point. Thanks for reminding me. From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sun Nov 28 14:14:58 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 14:14:58 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: <41AA0AFC.5080205@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41AA0AFC.5080205@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16810.9138.216440.885040@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > I'd also like to see the use of the target attribute spelt out in > examples ... Me too. > In general, I think that this sort of proposal is a good way to > go, but it looks premature for a Council decision now. We (at least I) am not looking for a Council decision of "yes, do it this way" or not -- I am looking for the Council to at least contribute substantially to the discussion, and, if needed, to wade in, roll their sleeves up, and work the issues out and come up with what TEI should do. That is, because (I feel) this single issue does not merit an entire WG being chartered, it's Council's job to work it out. > I want to see concrete proof of interchange, to ensure (for > example) that the work being done in OpenOffice is compatible. I don't know anything about what work is being done in OpenOffice, but I don't understand at first blush why TEI should be concerned about it. I think in general we should be looking how to encode things properly, and only ask about concrete details like implementations and compatibility when considering different "correct" approaches. I.e., it's important not to compromise good encoding for current pragmatics. > I also wonder, naturally, whether the TEI should be working in > this area of structured bibliographies. We could just suggest > that people code stuff in the MODS namespace. I've never used MODS. Can anyone comment on this? From Julia_Flanders at Brown.Edu Sun Nov 28 15:30:31 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.Edu (Flanders, Julia) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:30:31 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) Message-ID: <1A97D3D73A03FC419D87967D3CE4760C4BC9CD@MAIL1.AD.Brown.Edu> >From a quick look at MODS, I think the differences are sufficient to make a TEI element useful. MODS is aimed at cataloguing things, not at creating bibliographic entries, and its approach to the information is much more detailed in a way that's not likely to be intuitive for non-librarians. The digital libraries folks might prefer to use MODS (and presumably they can do so regardless) but for other TEI users I think it's helpful to have a simpler scheme that reflects the way they're accustomed to thinking about bibliographic entries. I like the nesting in the new proposal; the relationships between the various and elements in the old system always struck me as opaque, esp. when dealing with anything more complex than an article in a journal. Julia -----Original Message----- From: tei-council-bounces at lists.village.Virginia.EDU on behalf of Syd Bauman Sent: Sun 11/28/04 14:14 To: tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU Subject: Re: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) > I also wonder, naturally, whether the TEI should be working in > this area of structured bibliographies. We could just suggest > that people code stuff in the MODS namespace. I've never used MODS. Can anyone comment on this? _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 15:33:41 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:33:41 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] addendum to agenda (biblItem) In-Reply-To: <16810.9138.216440.885040@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <41AA0AFC.5080205@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16810.9138.216440.885040@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41AA3625.5010504@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: > > That is, because (I feel) this single issue does >not merit an entire WG being chartered, it's Council's job to work it >out. > > > you could argue that Council should charter the "using the TEI for new documents" workgroup, and that would include bibliographies >I don't know anything about what work is being done in OpenOffice, >but I don't understand at first blush why TEI should be concerned >about it. > > OO is an example of another communuty working in exactly the same area, marking up bibliographies. The reason we should be concerned is that the main use of this in the TEI world (I assume) is for bibliographies in metadata or new documents; and that means interaction with other systems. Its not a maybe, its an essential (in my mind) to be able to interact with bibliographical databases like Endnote. >I think in general we should be looking how to encode things >properly, and only ask about concrete details like implementations >and compatibility when considering different "correct" approaches. >I.e., it's important not to compromise good encoding for current >pragmatics. > > I agree in principle, but it's the large and active worlds of a) people doing bibliographical database software, and b) the MODS-like librarians, who are making the running in this area. IMHO :-} -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 16:06:12 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:06:12 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] report re META Message-ID: <41AA3DC4.4040004@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> There has not been any radical activity on the META front since the last Council phone call. The decision made then was to consolidate the ODD format by working on the processors, so many revisions have been made to Roma and the ODD-processing XSLT stylesheets. The results have been contained in CD distributions made for the members meeting, a course run by Lou and Laurent in Tunis, and a course run by James and Sebastian in London. Roma is now becoming increasingly stable as it gets more thorough testing. There are two major activities to undertake in the next 3 months: 1. Assuming the Council agrees to switch to @xml:id etc, the processing system for ODDs will require an important revision and re-testing. 2. The class system can now be overhauled, with each class being examined for * naming * function * membership It is proposed to convene an ad hoc working party to do this in a concentrated face to face meeting. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 16:40:41 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:40:41 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] ** conference call instructions have changed ** In-Reply-To: <69ABDF16-416C-11D9-A148-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> References: <69ABDF16-416C-11D9-A148-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Message-ID: <41AA45D9.4020804@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Thanks for the reminder David. Advance warning that Sebastian and I have another committment which means we will have to leave the call at 1400 sharp.... Lou David G. Durand wrote: > This is the same as the last call, but not the same as the instructions > Christian just posted! > > Ingenta has changed their conference calling service to one that > reduces the cost to European participants. > > The new instructions are as follows: > > Call the conferencing service: > > US (toll free): 1-866-722 8225 > UK (toll-free): 0800 953 1275 > Other International callers must call a regular UK number: > +44 1452 555 499 > > Should you want to call the toll number from within the UK, you would > dial: (0) 1452 555 499 > > when you are connected enter a PIN number: > 520522# > > It then asks you to state your name followed by a #. This announces you > to the list, and is probably worth doing. > --------- > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > > > David G. Durand > Director, Electronic Publishing Services > Ingenta Inc. > 111R Chestnut St. > Providence, RI 02903 USA > > T: +1 401-331-2014 x111 > T: +1 401-935-5317 Mobile > E: david.durand at ingenta.com > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 16:48:42 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:48:42 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: xml:lang attribute and P5 RNG schemas] Message-ID: <41AA47BA.8010409@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> The appended note to TEI-L reminds me that the current draft for P5 is a bit noncommittal on the subject of xml:lang I think we ought to try to decide (a) whether P5 should say that xml:lang *replaces* lang or may be used as an alternative (b) whether the declared value of xml:lang should be IDREF or CDATA At present the draft for CH recommends a particular way of constructing values for xml:lang which is derived from relevant standards: it has the status of a WG recommendation but has not yet been formally approved by the Council. For the record my vote is (a) lang should be replaced by xml:lang (b) it is CDATA Lou -------- Original Message -------- Subject: xml:lang attribute and P5 RNG schemas Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:10:08 +0000 From: Peter Heslin Reply-To: public at HESLIN.ECLIPSE.CO.UK To: TEI-L at LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU I am using Emacs nxml-mode to edit TEI documents, and I am using the pre-release version of the Relax NG schemas that I downloaded from the TEI web-site. Somewhere on that site,[1] I read that P5 will recommend using the standard xml:lang attribute rather than a TEI-defined lang attribute. So I tried that, but nxml-mode complains that xml:lang is not a valid attribute. Sure enough, the TEI schemas do not declare xml:lang, whereas, for example, the XHTML schema that comes with nxml-mode does declare it. It seems odd to me that it should be necessary to declare an attribute defined by the XML specification itself. So it may be that this is a bug in nxml-mode rather than in the P5 schema. Three possibilities occur to me: 1) I am mistaken in using xml:lang rather than lang in TEI P5, or perhaps the switch to xml:lang has not become official yet. 2) This is a bug in nxml-mode, which should always allow the xml:lang attribute in any element; it should be removed from the XHTML schema. 3) This is a bug in the P5 schema; xml:lang should be declared by schemas that want to use it. Best wishes, Peter [1] I can't remember where I saw this, but google gives this abstract: http://www.hum.gu.se/allcach2004/AP/html/prop142.html From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Nov 28 16:41:39 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:41:39 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: xml:lang attribute and P5 RNG schemas] In-Reply-To: <41AA47BA.8010409@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41AA47BA.8010409@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41AA4613.8060506@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Lou Burnard wrote: > > I think we ought to try to decide > (a) whether P5 should say that xml:lang *replaces* lang or may be > used as an alternative did the WG really not make a recommendation on this? > (b) whether the declared value of xml:lang should be IDREF or CDATA > I'd say it should be datatype.Key, ie CDATA, with the recommendation "It is expected that the set of possible values will be defined in the document header" -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 28 17:48:41 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:48:41 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] ** conference call instructions have changed ** In-Reply-To: <69ABDF16-416C-11D9-A148-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> (David G. Durand's message of "Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:36:26 -0500") References: <69ABDF16-416C-11D9-A148-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> Message-ID: "David G. Durand" writes: > This is the same as the last call, but not the same as the instructions > Christian just posted! Oops, sorry, I mixed it up again. The updated agenda I plan to post in five minutes will have it. I would also like to remind everybody that we need to look at a new conference hosting service and thank David for hosting this past year without a cent of cost to the TEI! If anybody can host a conference call like this through its institution, please step forward and make us an offer! Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 28 17:56:19 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:56:19 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: xml:lang attribute and P5 RNG schemas] In-Reply-To: <41AA4613.8060506@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Sebastian Rahtz's message of "Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:41:39 +0000") References: <41AA47BA.8010409@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41AA4613.8060506@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Sebastian Rahtz writes: > Lou Burnard wrote: > >> >> I think we ought to try to decide >> (a) whether P5 should say that xml:lang *replaces* lang or may be >> used as an alternative > > did the WG really not make a recommendation on this? My memory says the WG was non-commital and thought this should be decided by the council (though maybe based on some material provided by the WG). The draft text decidedly leaves open, but tacitly assumes some kind of alignment with xml:lang by using the same mechanism for constructing the attribute value for *:lang. > >> (b) whether the declared value of xml:lang should be IDREF or CDATA >> > I'd say it should be datatype.Key, ie CDATA, with the recommendation > "It is expected that the set of possible values will > be defined in the document header" Which is a nightmare for document interchange. Going with xml:lang, but with a reference to would give you essentially the same, but those who understand xml:lang could proceed right away. My vote is as follows: xml:lang value: formally CDATA, but in fact as spelled out in the draft [can this be formally checked?] Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 28 17:57:20 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:57:20 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] ** conference call instructions have changed ** In-Reply-To: <41AA45D9.4020804@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Lou Burnard's message of "Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:40:41 +0000") References: <69ABDF16-416C-11D9-A148-000393B3D7E2@ingenta.com> <41AA45D9.4020804@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Lou Burnard writes: > Thanks for the reminder David. > > Advance warning that Sebastian and I have another committment which > means we will have to leave the call at 1400 sharp.... So we have to try to stick to the agenda as strictly as possible. It would also be good if everybody tries to be there early, so that we can start on time. Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Nov 28 18:03:39 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:03:39 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] updated agenda for call on nov 29, 1300 UTC Message-ID: TEI Council Members and Editors: This is the agenda for the conference call the TEI Council will hold later this coming Monday, Nov 29th, 2004 at 1300 UTC. Please try to call in early, so that we can start on time. Please read through the following, in advance of the call. INSTRUCTIONS for conference call (updated!!): Call the conferencing service: US (toll free): 1-866-722 8225 UK (toll-free): 0800 953 1275 Other International callers must call a regular UK number: +44 1452 555 499 Should you want to call the toll number from within the UK, you would dial: (0) 1452 555 499 when you are connected enter a PIN number: 520522# Expected members to participate: Syd Bauman, Alejandro Bia, David Birnbaum, Lou Burnard, Matthew Driscoll, David Durand, Julia Flanders, Sebastian Rahtz, Laurent Romary, Natasha Smith, Susan Schreibman, Edward Vanhoutte, Perry Willett, Christian Wittern. Welcome to participate are also James Cummings and John Walsh Agenda: 8 items, not more than 15 minutes apiece. ----------------------------------------------------- 1) Review of the minutes from the call of Sep. 20th (5 min) Minutes of the meeting are at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm13.html. Review of action items, progress. 2) Short report from the MM2004 (5 min, Lou Burnard) ----------------------------------------------------- 3) Sanskrit taskforce report (5 min): Please read http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/CE/cew12.pdf ----------------------------------------------------- 4) Rollcall on the active WGs (15 min) : Standoff (SOW09), Manuscripts, Feature Structures, Physical Bibliography, Meta Language ----------------------------------------------------- 5) xml-colon-thing (15 min) How should xml:id, xml:lang be handled? See the discussion on tei-council in the last weeks. ----------------------------------------------------- 6) Development of stylesheets What role do the stylesheets Sebastian is currently maintaining play for the TEI? Should the TEI charge an effort for revising them? For creating documentation? Should some of the practice (values for @rend, table formatting, new attributes ) be integrated into the Guidelines? and similar questions should be considered. ----------------------------------------------------- 7) BiblItem, (10 minutes) please see http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.html http://www.tei-c.org/Council/sfw01.xml We basically need to decide wether to charge some activity on this or proceed with it within the Council. My recommendation would be to ask a small group (1-3 persons, not necessarily all from the council) to make a survey of existing practice & developments and give us some recommendations on how to proceed. There is the OO development, but also refdb and MODS which work in a similar area. 8) Other business (5 minutes) TBA 9) Meetings: (5 minutes) Council meeting next year ? when, where Conference call setup? -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Sun Nov 28 23:26:06 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:26:06 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] [Fwd: xml:lang attribute and P5 RNG schemas] In-Reply-To: References: <41AA47BA.8010409@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41AA4613.8060506@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16810.42206.902868.80511@cushing.cis.brown.edu> I don't think the WG was non-committal on this at all. The WG was completely firm (with 1 dissent) on using xml:lang=. The WG was a little less firm (3 explicit votes in favor, no dissension) on how the value of xml:lang= would be (optionally) associated with a in the header. The 3 explicit votes all favored the plan I brought up in Ghent, namely that should bear a (required?) ident= attribute, and the value of xml:lang= would be compared to it. The WG made no suggestion as to the type of attribute xml:lang= would be, but I have always presumed we would declare it as tei.langtag or some such, which in turn would be declared to be as close as we could get to an RFC 3066 language tag. I.e., in DTD language it would be CDATA, if we could use RelaxNG directly it would be xsd:language, a datatype defined by W3C Schema just for this[1]. The only minor catch is that it is defined as RFC 3066 language tags, and by the time P5 comes out there may be a successor to 3066. I think we should presume W3C will follow suit relatively quickly (they did move from 1766 to 3066 when that happened, I think). Note ---- [1] See http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#language. From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Mon Nov 29 06:26:57 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:26:57 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Apologies In-Reply-To: <16810.5016.577412.894677@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <16810.5016.577412.894677@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41AB0781.30302@kantl.be> Dear All, I'm sorry I won't be able to attend todays' conference call. I'll be in an urgent meeting with our prime minister over the plan of our minister of culture to put the building of the Royal Academy up for sale. Sorry about this. The building of the Royal Academy is still available, however, for Council meetings etc. But maybe we should take a look at the residency of the council members to take a lowest-cost decision on the next face to face meeting? Best, Edward -- ================ Edward Vanhoutte Co-ordinator Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies Reviews Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 edward dot vanhoutte at kantl dot be http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm From mjd at hum.ku.dk Mon Nov 29 06:42:32 2004 From: mjd at hum.ku.dk (M. J. Driscoll) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:42:32 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Apologies In-Reply-To: <41AB0781.30302@kantl.be> References: <16810.5016.577412.894677@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41AB1938.24469.C994BC@localhost> Well, if they're determined to sell, perhaps the TEI should consider buying. I think the building of the Royal Academy would make a fine permanent home for the TEI. Good central location, excellent restaurants, plenty of beer. Think about it. MJD From Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu Mon Nov 29 08:08:15 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:08:15 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] report, very late, from PB WG Message-ID: I have just received email from Terry Catapano indicating that a brief summary of progress to date on the PB workgroup may be found at: http://www.columbia.edu/~thc4/tei-pb/summary.html Julia From Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu Mon Nov 29 11:08:31 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:08:31 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] sourceforge project monitoring Message-ID: I just checked on the SourceForge site, and apparently the project monitoring Lou describes is available only with a paid subscription (US$39.90). While this isn't a lot, it may not be something all Council members feel like paying, nor is it something the TEI should require of its Council members. Instead, I suggest that Council members should probably make a habit of checking the SourceForge site once a week to see whether there are new feature requests, and should sign up to be notified of changes/new postings to any of those features in which they feel an ongoing interest. Best wishes, Julia From pwillett at umich.edu Mon Nov 29 11:16:59 2004 From: pwillett at umich.edu (Perry Willett) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:16:59 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Hosting a TEI council meeting In-Reply-To: <41AB0781.30302@kantl.be> Message-ID: <001901c4d62e$dd93b0e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> I'd be happy to host the next Council meeting here in Ann Arbor at the University of Michigan. We're a half-hour from the Detroit airport (DTW), a major hub for Northwest airlines. There are plenty of lodging opportunities near campus, although the hotels nearest campus are somewhat pricey: $130-160 night. There are nearby b&b's that are good, and hotels slightly farther out that are much less expensive. Plenty of good restaurants etc. More at If we were to come here, we would want to do it after the commencement ceremony, when students have cleared out. Commencement is April 29-May 1, and there won't be any hotel rooms to be found for that weekend, so sometime after that would be the only option. Perry Willett University of Michigan pwillett at umich.edu From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 11:31:32 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:31:32 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Hosting a TEI council meeting In-Reply-To: <001901c4d62e$dd93b0e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> References: <001901c4d62e$dd93b0e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> Message-ID: <41AB4EE4.1000005@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> I will almost certainly be unable to get to the council meeting in May, wherever it is held, as I expect to be in East Timor in April and May. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu Mon Nov 29 12:15:47 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:15:47 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets Message-ID: I was asked to put together a proposal for how the TEI might handle a call for stylesheets. I have two proposals to suggest: 1. The Contest This option would require more input from the TEI, since it requires a group of judges, and would generate more buzz and perhaps a better outcome. The TEI would announce a contest to produce TEI stylesheets. A set of requirements would be posted (e.g. must include documentation, must handle a minimum set of elements, etc.). The contest could be broken down into categories: --"model" (i.e. a configurable template) --general --drama --verse --academic writing (grant proposals, reports, academic papers) --dictionaries --etc. Contestants would submit stylesheets in one or more of these categories, conforming to the requirements posted. The judging committee would review all submissions, and would award a prize for best in each category, based on criteria such as clarity of documentation, comprehensiveness, attractiveness, etc. The prize could just be recognition, or could be a copy of P4, or a one-year paid subscription to SourceForge, or something of that nature. All submissions would be made available on the TEI web site. Perhaps, given the desirability of the "model" category, an especially valuable prize could be offered--e.g. a free one-year div3 membership to the institution of your choice? 2. The PRFSS This option is much simpler; it just involves issuing a persuasive request for stylesheets. Projects that have developed stylesheets for their own use would be encouraged (begged) to submit them, along with documentation of what they do and a brief abstract indicating their range of usefulness. A minimum set of requirements would be posted. Note that this call for stylesheets interlocks nicely with the call for TEI samples, which was discussed at both the TEI Tools SIG and the TEI Education SIG. Having a set of sample documents would make it easier for people to test their stylesheets, and would also provide a basis for judging the stylesheets submitted, in the case of the contest. Best wishes, Julia From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Mon Nov 29 13:18:54 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:18:54 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call Message-ID: <16811.26638.200850.729968@cushing.cis.brown.edu> The first draft of the notes from this morning's conference call are now available at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm14.html http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm14.xml As always please read over and post any corrections. From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 13:16:53 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:16:53 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41AB6795.8030106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> For those of us who had to leave early, can you summarize the rationale? At first sight, this is a slightly strange request. Writing a set of stylesheets to render TEI documents well is a serious exercise in software engineering, not a weekend bit of fun to win a competition :-} -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 14:16:58 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:16:58 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: <16811.26638.200850.729968@cushing.cis.brown.edu> References: <16811.26638.200850.729968@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41AB75AA.4070806@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: > The first draft of the notes from this morning's conference call are > now available at > http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm14.html > http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm14.xml > > As always please read over and post any corrections. > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > Amazing fast turn round! Some suggested corrections: Under Finalize draft of MS: "but concern was expressed that there has been no response to some of the detailed comments that have been made." -> Council agreed that once the draft was publicized, comments on it should receive rapid attention from the MS taskforce. "Councilors" (passim) -> "Council members" (for consistency) "suggested that Councilors should look at items in the order they personally prefer" -> "suggesting that Council members should feel free to look at and comment on any items in which they were personally interested" "available on the web" (add xref to www.tei-c.org/Members/2004-Baltimore/ maybe?) I would delete: "SB thought there was a reason for some, if not all, of these apparent discrepancies, but could not recall them. " "xpointer schemes, if which discussion was deferred." -> xpointer schemes, concerning which discussion was deferred. (till when? should probly be an action point I think describing Sebastian's stylesheets as a "problem" is pretty cheeky but that's not relevant. On a matter of fact: yes the source forge version is the only one which is currently being maintained, and so any residual ones on the website should certainly be tidied up. Likewise e.g. tei-emacs which I was about to do this morning when I had to rush off to do something else... "It was suggested that a small group to look at the broader view around this issue" insert "be formed" maybe? And I thought the point was not to have more broader discussion but to decide on whether or not the proposal is acceptable as it stands? "It was noted that we do not know who, other than PT, participated in the creation of the current proposal." Andreas Nolde and Bruce d'Arblay chiefly, I think. Isn't it in the discussion log, which you (I thought) were a member of? From Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu Mon Nov 29 14:25:51 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:25:51 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: <41AB6795.8030106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41AB6795.8030106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: The motivation was a desire to offer a wider range of stylesheets that work with TEI than are currently available at the TEI web site, and to do so with as little cost to the TEI as possible. We assumed that there are by now a number of examples out there; projects have presumably developed stylesheets for their own use, which could be rendered sharable without too much effort. There's also the possibility that making this a sort of community project would motivate people to make and share improvements on the most promising samples. ("perfect, if only it did XYZ...") So I wasn't imagining that people would whip up a stylesheet just for the competition, but that they would take something they already have and document and/or polish it for sharing purposes. >For those of us who had to leave early, can you summarize the >rationale? At first sight, this >is a slightly strange request. Writing a set of stylesheets to >render TEI documents well >is a serious exercise in software engineering, not a weekend bit of >fun to win a competition :-} > >-- >Sebastian Rahtz >Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services >13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 > >OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service >http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 15:10:49 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:10:49 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: References: <41AB6795.8030106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41AB8249.1060400@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Julia Flanders wrote: > > There's also the possibility that making this a sort of community > project would motivate people to make and share improvements on the > most promising samples. ("perfect, if only it did XYZ...") > > So I wasn't imagining that people would whip up a stylesheet just for > the competition, but that they would take something they already have > and document and/or polish it for sharing purposes. If I wear my open source hat, I don't think this is very efficient way to proceed. If we end up with 10 stylesheets by 10 different people, written in 10 different coding styles, covering 10 different areas of the TEI, with 10 different copyright notices, what then? How do you compare them? Who are the judges? It would be much better for people to join in a single community project and contribute according to their ability, I think. I stress the issue of licensing. If a stylesheet written by A N Other is posted on the TEI web site, it needs an open source license to be of practical uses to other projects. Better, the copyright would be donated to the TEI, so that we can guard the IPR for future generations. Since I didn't take part in the conversation, I find it hard to understand what people were thinking they really wanted here. The minutes say "Council discussed the problem of SR's style-sheets and the dichotomy that they serve both as an example and what the TEI itself uses". I suggest that this dichotomy is entirely illusory: the stylesheets are NOT intended as an example of TEI XSLT programming at all, but as a serious contribution for real use. The idea of them as an "example" is a piece of mischievous whimsy spread by Michael Beddow; they are _not_ written as a master class in obscure XSLT to challenge future generations! The dichotomy is between their twin parentage of what I provide and maintain for my local department, and what I wrote with NSF funding for the TEI. Possibly in retrospect it was a bad idea to make the stylesheets for the TEIC depend on the ones for Oxford. It seems to me that there are two very different problems here: a) we need more examples of TEI-processing software for people to study and get ideas from. we definitely want to encourage people to show their work. I personally dislike the idea of a competition, but its a possible way to proceed. b) we (the TEIC) own the copyright[1] of all the XSLT code which I maintain on Sourceforge, and we need it for our internal work (viz, producing the Guidelines); but those stylesheets are not well-documented, and their parameterized interface is fairly off-putting as a result. We need to decide whether the TEI really wants this sorted out, and take a more positive fatherhood role over its bastard child, or whether to leave them as is as internal tools which the editorial process uses. I don't think you solve problem b) with the solution to problem a). So which do we care about more? Just to clear up a misunderstanding, by the way, the stylesheet releases on the TEI Web site are the last version which I wanted to release publicly. I have not neglected this, it is intentional. I am currently in the throes of making the stylesheets do the right thing with xml:id and @target, so they are in a mess right now. [1] its rather important that this be the case, as otherwise I'd have problems with IPR at Oxford. long story. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 15:24:09 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:24:09 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41AB8569.1010705@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Apropos of nothing, this needs to qualify what the stylesheets are to _do_. To make HTML/XHTML? XSL FO? LaTeX? groff? RTF? OpenOffice? CSV files? It would also be nice to kickstart TEI P5, by getting software capable of processing P5 files, but maybe thats a little ambitious just yet. I am afraid I manage this rather mechanistically by writing the stylesheets ready for P5, and then dumbing them down to P4 with a gross Perl script. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 15:28:38 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:28:38 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] sans critters Message-ID: <41AB8676.9060401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Does anyone have the source of the Sanskrit folks document which was discussed today? or even just the PDF to hand? I want to extract the examples and use them for testing. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 15:57:18 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:57:18 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] sans critters In-Reply-To: <41AB8676.9060401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41AB8676.9060401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41AB8D2E.9010502@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Sebastian Rahtz wrote: > Does anyone have the source of the Sanskrit folks document > which was discussed today? or even just the PDF to hand? > > I want to extract the examples and use them for testing. > We havent been given the source, but the PDF is on the website and linked from the agenda: //TEI/web/Activities/CE/cew12.pdf From Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu Mon Nov 29 16:52:02 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.edu (Julia Flanders) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:52:02 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: <41AB8249.1060400@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41AB6795.8030106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41AB8249.1060400@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Sebastian, you're right, one stipulation would need to be that the donor of any stylesheet gives permission for general use in some standard way specified by the TEI. I assume we have such an arrangement where applicable for any TEI tool or stylesheet currently made available via our site, and that we would continue to do so. This is not an obstacle, just a thing to remember. The point of the contest was not primarily to make a big deal of adjudicating among the contestants, but to provide a bit of fun to motivate people to contribute. So the questions of how you compare them and who are the judges is not really central here. It's just a front for a community project (a heap of style sheets that can serve as the basis for further development and improvement), a foolish game to motivate the activity. But if we don't like the idea of the competition, then there's no need to use it. Just requesting that people donate stylesheets would also be fine. I should also stress that I think having 10 different people contributing stylesheets on 10 different areas of the TEI is a good thing--this kind of diversity would be a good way to give people more options, more examples of possible approaches. Having 10 different coding styles might or might not be a problem; I don't know enough about XSLT to know whether this would be illuminating for comparison purposes, or just a hassle. However, since we're working with donated materials here, we're scarcely in a position to complain, unless "difference" means "broken". If there are particular problems or approaches that we want to exclude we could include this in the RFP. Concerning your last point--although the TEI stylesheets, as you say, are designed for internal use, the fact that they're distributed with OxyGen has given them an unintended status. The goal of the solicitation proposal was to place these stylesheets in a larger context of possibilities, and to reduce people's reliance on them. At the moment, people use them for things they're not intended for, just because they're handy. It would be great if we had more options to show people. My personal feeling is that the TEI probably doesn't want to try to create "official" stylesheets--that the better approach is to offer people a bunch of samples, and to encourage people to create samples that are as good as possible. If people want to work on the current TEI stylesheets in an open-source spirit, modify them, etc., I think that would be great, but I personally wouldn't be in favor of focusing on these stylesheets instead of calling for broader community input and samples. Anyway--it sounds as if this is one vote against the competition but in favor of soliciting donated stylesheets...? At 8:10 PM +0000 11/29/04, Sebastian Rahtz wrote: >Julia Flanders wrote: > >> >> There's also the possibility that making this a sort of community >>project would motivate people to make and share improvements on the >>most promising samples. ("perfect, if only it did XYZ...") >> >> So I wasn't imagining that people would whip up a stylesheet just >>for the competition, but that they would take something they >>already have and document and/or polish it for sharing purposes. > >If I wear my open source hat, I don't think this is very efficient >way to proceed. If we end up with 10 stylesheets >by 10 different people, written in 10 different coding styles, >covering 10 different areas of the TEI, >with 10 different copyright notices, what then? How do you compare >them? Who are the judges? >It would be much better for people to join in a single community >project and contribute according to their ability, >I think. > >I stress the issue of licensing. If a stylesheet written by A N >Other is posted on the TEI web site, >it needs an open source license to be of practical uses to other >projects. Better, the copyright would >be donated to the TEI, so that we can guard the IPR for future generations. > >Since I didn't take part in the conversation, I find it hard to >understand what people were thinking >they really wanted here. The minutes say "Council discussed the >problem of SR's style-sheets and the dichotomy >that they serve both as an example and what the TEI itself uses". I >suggest that this dichotomy >is entirely illusory: the stylesheets are NOT intended as an example >of TEI XSLT programming at all, >but as a serious contribution for real use. The idea of them as an >"example" is a piece of mischievous whimsy >spread by Michael Beddow; they are _not_ written as a master class >in obscure XSLT to challenge >future generations! The dichotomy is between their twin parentage of >what I provide and maintain >for my local department, and what I wrote with NSF funding for the >TEI. Possibly in retrospect it was a bad >idea to make the stylesheets for the TEIC depend on the ones for Oxford. > >It seems to me that there are two very different problems here: > >a) we need more examples of TEI-processing software for people to >study and get ideas from. > we definitely want to encourage people to show their work. I >personally dislike the idea of a > competition, but its a possible way to proceed. > >b) we (the TEIC) own the copyright[1] of all the XSLT code which I >maintain on Sourceforge, and > we need it for our internal work (viz, producing the Guidelines); >but those stylesheets are not > well-documented, and their parameterized interface is fairly >off-putting as a result. We need to > decide whether the TEI really wants this sorted out, and take a >more positive fatherhood role over its > bastard child, or whether to leave them as is as internal tools >which the editorial process uses. > I don't think you solve problem b) with the solution to problem a). >So which do we care about more? > >Just to clear up a misunderstanding, by the way, the stylesheet >releases on the TEI Web site >are the last version which I wanted to release publicly. I have not >neglected this, it is >intentional. I am currently in the throes of making the stylesheets >do the right thing >with xml:id and @target, so they are in a mess right now. > >[1] its rather important that this be the case, as otherwise I'd >have problems with IPR at Oxford. long >story. > >-- >Sebastian Rahtz >Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services >13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 > >OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service >http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 17:00:04 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:00:04 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] proposal: call for stylesheets In-Reply-To: References: <41AB6795.8030106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41AB8249.1060400@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41AB9BE4.2010703@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Julia Flanders wrote: > Sebastian, you're right, one stipulation would need to be that the > donor of any stylesheet gives permission for general use in some > standard way specified by the TEI. I assume we have such an > arrangement where applicable for any TEI tool or stylesheet currently > made available via our site, and that we would continue to do so. In fact, we don't have such an arrangement. we really should do so. > > The point of the contest was not primarily to make a big deal of > adjudicating among the contestants, but to provide a bit of fun to > motivate people to contribute well, anything's worth trying! > > Concerning your last point--although the TEI stylesheets, as you say, > are designed for internal use, the fact that they're distributed with > OxyGen has given them an unintended status. They weren't designed for internal use, though. They were designed to be used for real > > Anyway--it sounds as if this is one vote against the competition but > in favor of soliciting donated stylesheets...? sure, I have no problem soliciting more stuff to link to from the web site. I do have a problem asking for stuff to be _delivered_ from the TEI web site, as it involves the IPR and maintenance issues. I don't mind competitions _per se_. But as I say, it doesn't address something which I think is a bigger problem. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Nov 29 18:36:06 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:36:06 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Hosting a TEI council meeting In-Reply-To: <41AB4EE4.1000005@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Sebastian Rahtz's message of "Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:31:32 +0000") References: <001901c4d62e$dd93b0e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> <41AB4EE4.1000005@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Sebastian Rahtz writes: > I will almost certainly be unable to get to the council meeting in May, > wherever it is held, as I expect to be in East Timor in April and May. > We haven't fixed the date yet, although Syd suggested end of April / early May. When would be a date suitable to your schedule? Also, I assume having a Council meeting after the META tei-classes meeting would be desirable, so the scheduling for that meeting should also be done pretty soon. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Nov 29 18:45:46 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:45:46 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Hosting a TEI council meeting In-Reply-To: References: <001901c4d62e$dd93b0e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> <41AB4EE4.1000005@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41ABB4AA.2090005@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Christian Wittern wrote: > >We haven't fixed the date yet, although Syd suggested end of April / >early May. When would be a date suitable to your schedule? > > > I expect to be away all of April and May, and the first half of June. Rule me out of discussions, really. This is going to wreck my year in a big way, I suspect :-} >Also, I assume having a Council meeting after the META tei-classes >meeting would be desirable, so the scheduling for that meeting should >also be done pretty soon. > > yes, indeed. we need to have that meeting in late January, I guess -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Mon Nov 29 21:10:07 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 21:10:07 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] report, very late, from PB WG In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16811.54911.87396.391909@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > I have just received email from Terry Catapano indicating that a > brief summary of progress to date on the PB workgroup may be found at: > http://www.columbia.edu/~thc4/tei-pb/summary.html This has now been moved to the PB part of the TEI website: http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/PB/pbr01.xml http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/PB/pbr01.html From Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Tue Nov 30 12:23:22 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:23:22 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: <41AB75AA.4070806@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <16811.26638.200850.729968@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41AB75AA.4070806@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16812.44170.115789.651448@cushing.cis.brown.edu> > Under Finalize draft of MS: > "but concern was expressed that there has been no response to some of > the detailed comments that have been made." > -> Council agreed that once the draft was publicized, comments on it > should receive rapid attention from the MS taskforce. Done. > "Councilors" (passim) -> "Council members" (for consistency) Done. > "suggested that Councilors should look at items in the > order they personally prefer" > -> "suggesting that Council members should feel free to look at and > comment on any items in which they were personally interested" Done. > "available on the web" (add xref to > www.tei-c.org/Members/2004-Baltimore/ maybe?) Eh. Seemed like a bad idea at the time, but sure. > I would delete: "SB thought there > was a reason for some, if not all, of these apparent > discrepancies, but could not recall them. " OK. It was in there mostly to help hedge our bets (for which it isn't really needed) and to try to remind me to research this and post about it ASAR after we get P5 on SF. > -> xpointer schemes, concerning which discussion was deferred. (till > when? should probly be an action point Wording changed. But no 'when' was decided, and no actions were proposed, let alone accepted. In fact, even the word "deferred" is a bit strong -- Sebastian merely pointed out we didn't have to discuss the scheme part now to agree to the rest, so I made the presumption that Council was only agreeing to the rest. I'm not sure it was completely explicit. > I think describing Sebastian's stylesheets as a "problem" is pretty > cheeky but that's not relevant. Yes it is (relevant). Badly worded on my part; reworded to avoid the implication that the stylesheets are the problem. (Thanks, Julia!) > yes the source forge version is the only one which is currently > being maintained, and so any residual ones on the website should > certainly be tidied up. Likewise e.g. tei-emacs Thanks for the clarification. > I thought the point was not to have more broader discussion but to > decide on whether or not the proposal is acceptable as it stands? That may have been the idea you expressed before departing, but it's not what was eventually decided. > Andreas Nolde and Bruce d'Arblay chiefly, I think. Isn't it in > the discussion log, which you (I thought) were a member of? What discussion log? Trembley refers only to "the group" in his postings. I have a vauge recollection of reference to xml-biblio (another SF project), but I haven't been following it. Updated version should be out in a few minutes. From alex.bia at ua.es Wed Dec 1 22:00:23 2004 From: alex.bia at ua.es (Alejandro Bia) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:00:23 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Update on my whereabouts and apologies for missing last conf-call Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041202032643.03cf8b60@mussol.umh.es> Dear TEI-C members: A recent email by Christian Wittern reminded me I have news to tell, though I never find the time to write them down. Recently I've changed my affiliation. Now I'm a full time lecturer at another local university, but I still keep my links with the library as an honorary consultant. My new working conditions are better (higher salary, more time for research, better future possibilities, and last but not least: more freedom), but I still have my heart at the Cervantes D.L. I currently spend half of the week at the new university, and the other half at the old one, since I'm still involved in long term research projects at U. Alicante, and belong to a research group there. At a point I will have to be more selective and reduce or eliminate some activities. Time will tell. The new university (Miguel Hern?ndez University), has four campuses spread along the province of Alicante. It is really new (8 years old), and there is more potential for growth there. Now I'm teaching software engineering, and next semester project management and web environment design (all are topics I like and enjoy to teach). I regret to have missed the conf-call of last Monday. I was traveling to Madrid where I gave a talk on good practices and recommendations for starting digitization projects at the National Library. People is increasingly getting interested in digitization and web publishing there. I tried to enthused them with Spanish flavored TEI and teiPublisher. The pace is hectic, but I'm quite happy... Best, Alex.- --------------------------------------------------------- ALEJANDRO BIA-PLATAS e-mail: abia at umh.es Departamento de Estad?stica y Matem?tica Aplicada Universidad Miguel Hern?ndez Edificio Torretamarit Avenida de la Universidad s/n, E-03202, Elche, ESPA?A http://www.umh.es/ Tel: +34 966658542 Fax: +34 966658715 Tel?fono m?vil: +34 610806427 --------------------------------------------------------- From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Wed Dec 1 22:54:15 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:54:15 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Update on my whereabouts and apologies for missing last conf-call In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20041202032643.03cf8b60@mussol.umh.es> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20041202032643.03cf8b60@mussol.umh.es> Message-ID: <16814.37351.855738.436357@emt.wwp.brown.edu> Congratulations, Alejandro. Best of luck in your new position. As for us, we can only hope that your new position permits you the time and energy to continue to contribute to TEI, and that, should the chance for a TEI meeting in Alicante arise, the new university is half as hospitable as the old. :-) Best to you and Mar. From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Dec 2 18:54:52 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:54:52 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith Message-ID: Dear Council members, As promised, here is the draft of my reply to John Smith and the Sanskrit taskforce. Any comments welcome. ============================================================ Dear John, At its recent telephone conference, the TEI Council discussed the proposal you submitted on behalf of the Sanskrit taskforce and I would like to inform you now of the results. The TEI Council welcomed the submission and would like to thank you and your collaborators for your work at enhancing the TEI applicability to Sanskrit and other languages that require complex analytical encoding. The TEI Council agreed that the proposed form could be used to encode this forms for data interchange and that it should be used in the next version of the Guidelines to illustrate the use the intended linguistic analysis, as well as the use of within . The ensuing discussion centered around how the constraints on the use of attribute values, that are implicit or in the text of your proposal could be formalized using a schema language. Several possibilities were proposed, but none of them could be immediately agreed on. As it turned out, validation in a very rigid form for a case like this will require the TEI to review the procedures within the overall framework of the TEI. The last issue, which basically means that no immediate, automatic validation through a xml parser is available, should be a minor concern to your group, I think, since the software you are developping will act as some kind of special-purpose-validator, as its function will depend on the correct application of the markup. If that does not sound feasible, a Schematron rule could be used to validate the markup. While the validation procedure is still pending, the TEI Council thinks the markup as suggested is useful and appropriate and would like to encourage you to implement it as it stands. All the best, Christian Wittern Chair, TEI Technical Council ============================================================ -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Thu Dec 2 19:07:06 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 09:07:06 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: <16812.44170.115789.651448@cushing.cis.brown.edu> (Syd Bauman's message of "Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:23:22 -0500") References: <16811.26638.200850.729968@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41AB75AA.4070806@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16812.44170.115789.651448@cushing.cis.brown.edu> Message-ID: Dear Syd and Council members, The minutes of our call on Monday look fine to me, thank you Syd for making them available so quickly and accurately. As noted in the minutes, our next call is scheduled for Jan 31, 2005 1300 UTC. I hope that all who are Council members on that date will verify their availability and speak up *now* if there is a need to reschedule. I know that sudden changes might always occur, but would like to make sure that no oversight keeps Council members from participating due to commitments that are known today. Also, I would like to proceed with the planning for next year, especially the Council meeting as soon as possible. Sebastian said he is not available from early April to mid June. I think it would be desirable to have a meeting scheduled so that he can participate, so I would like to reopen the issue of timing of the meeting. Is there anything that speaks against a meeting in the second half of June? All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From sschreib at umd.edu Thu Dec 2 23:28:38 2004 From: sschreib at umd.edu (Susan Schreibman) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 23:28:38 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call Message-ID: <1102048118.802efc00sschreib@umd.edu> Hi Christian The ACH/ALLC is 15-18 June in Victoria, Canada, and several of us will be there, as well as teaching in a summer school the week before. I will also have to stay on a few days for other project work. So if it is very late June, that should be ok for me at least. susan -----Original Message----- From: Christian Wittern To: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 09:07:06 +0900 Subject: Re: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call Dear Syd and Council members, The minutes of our call on Monday look fine to me, thank you Syd for making them available so quickly and accurately. As noted in the minutes, our next call is scheduled for Jan 31, 2005 1300 UTC. I hope that all who are Council members on that date will verify their availability and speak up *now* if there is a need to reschedule. I know that sudden changes might always occur, but would like to make sure that no oversight keeps Council members from participating due to commitments that are known today. Also, I would like to proceed with the planning for next year, especially the Council meeting as soon as possible. Sebastian said he is not available from early April to mid June. I think it would be desirable to have a meeting scheduled so that he can participate, so I would like to reopen the issue of timing of the meeting. Is there anything that speaks against a meeting in the second half of June? All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Fri Dec 3 07:21:35 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 07:21:35 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] xml-colon-thing In-Reply-To: <41A25285.7040101@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41939E49.7070303@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16787.63896.887263.393490@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <419402CD.1030509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16788.6838.433641.713088@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A0F482.3040301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41A10420.4060106@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16801.11642.630817.17350@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A1CBEE.7020903@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16802.15995.327189.209887@cushing.cis.brown.edu> <41A25285.7040101@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16816.23119.510137.207475@emt.wwp.brown.edu> > >Either way. But if we do the "close for a week" method, we need to > >take a "snapshot" before we start messing around, to make backing > >out easy if something goes wrong. > I'l think you find we use a version control system which looks after > this for us :-} That's exactly what I meant ... to use Perforce's 'label' feature. From pwillett at umich.edu Fri Dec 3 08:01:06 2004 From: pwillett at umich.edu (Perry Willett) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:01:06 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c4d938$2a14d1e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> The American Library Assn has its annual convention in Chicago on June 24-28. I have to attend (whether I want to or not). Perry Willett University of Michigan pwillett at umich.edu -----Original Message----- From: tei-council-bounces at lists.village.Virginia.EDU [mailto:tei-council-bounces at lists.village.Virginia.EDU] On Behalf Of Christian Wittern Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 7:07 PM To: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu Cc: TEI Council Subject: Re: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call Dear Syd and Council members, The minutes of our call on Monday look fine to me, thank you Syd for making them available so quickly and accurately. As noted in the minutes, our next call is scheduled for Jan 31, 2005 1300 UTC. I hope that all who are Council members on that date will verify their availability and speak up *now* if there is a need to reschedule. I know that sudden changes might always occur, but would like to make sure that no oversight keeps Council members from participating due to commitments that are known today. Also, I would like to proceed with the planning for next year, especially the Council meeting as soon as possible. Sebastian said he is not available from early April to mid June. I think it would be desirable to have a meeting scheduled so that he can participate, so I would like to reopen the issue of timing of the meeting. Is there anything that speaks against a meeting in the second half of June? All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council From jawalsh at indiana.edu Fri Dec 3 09:32:43 2004 From: jawalsh at indiana.edu (John A. Walsh) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:32:43 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call In-Reply-To: <000001c4d938$2a14d1e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> References: <000001c4d938$2a14d1e0$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> Message-ID: <31A1DE8E-4538-11D9-B79E-000D9334E716@indiana.edu> And June 15-18 is the annual ACH/ALLC conference in Victoria, BC, Canada. John | John A. Walsh, Associate Director for Projects and Services | Digital Library Program / Indiana University Libraries | Indiana University, 1320 East Tenth Street, Bloomington, IN 47405 | Voice:812-855-8758 Fax:812-856-2062 On Dec 3, 2004, at 8:01 AM, Perry Willett wrote: > The American Library Assn has its annual convention in Chicago on June > 24-28. I have to attend (whether I want to or not). > > Perry Willett > University of Michigan > pwillett at umich.edu > > > -----Original Message----- > From: tei-council-bounces at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > [mailto:tei-council-bounces at lists.village.Virginia.EDU] On Behalf Of > Christian Wittern > Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 7:07 PM > To: Syd_Bauman at brown.edu > Cc: TEI Council > Subject: Re: [tei-council] notes from this morning's call > > > Dear Syd and Council members, > > The minutes of our call on Monday look fine to me, thank you Syd for > making them available so quickly and accurately. > > As noted in the minutes, our next call is scheduled for Jan 31, 2005 > 1300 UTC. I hope that all who are Council members on that date will > verify their availability and speak up *now* if there is a need to > reschedule. I know that sudden changes might always occur, but would > like to make sure that no oversight keeps Council members from > participating due to commitments that are known today. > > Also, I would like to proceed with the planning for next year, > especially the Council meeting as soon as possible. Sebastian said he > is not available from early April to mid June. I think it would be > desirable to have a meeting scheduled so that he can participate, so I > would like to reopen the issue of timing of the meeting. Is there > anything that speaks against a meeting in the second half of June? > > All the best, > > Christian > > -- > > Christian Wittern > Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University > 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > From sschreib at umd.edu Sat Dec 4 12:31:15 2004 From: sschreib at umd.edu (Susan Schreibman) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 12:31:15 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] next Council meeting Message-ID: <005501c4da27$0ef47ce0$6500a8c0@susandelllapt> hi all -- I can also host the Council meeting here. We would have to work around graduation dates and sporting events, but there is a nice room in the library we can use to hold the meeting. There are three airports in the area, Regan National and BWI are the nearest. Regan is often the most inexpensive to fly into, but it is a long trip to UMD. Hotels vary widely. The Inn and Conference Centre on campus is the nicest hotel around, but it is between $139-159 per room per night. There is a Quality Inn within walking distance which is considerably cheaper, but not as nice, $79-119 per night. For those who came in for the Migration Work Group, that was the hotel we used. There are many great restaurants in the DC area, but none are within walking distance. For the Migration Group we had several cars, so we were able to drive to decent restaurants for dinner. This time, I'm not sure if anybody would have a car besides me, so we might have to rent a car. Another option would be to go downtown by metro. Susan ____________________________ Dr Susan Schreibman Assistant Director Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities (MITH) McKeldin Library University of Maryland, College Park, 20742 Phone: 301 405 8505 Fax: 301 314 7111 Email: sschreib at umd.edu From James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Dec 5 11:29:43 2004 From: James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (James Cummings) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 16:29:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [tei-council] next Council meeting (fwd) Message-ID: And this time posting from the correct address... -James --- Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 22:22:35 +0000 (GMT) From: James Cummings To: tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU Subject: Re: [tei-council] next Council meeting I promised to provide a similar list of hotels for Oxford. Sorry for the delay in doing so, I'm currently in Uppsala Sweden where I've just taught two full days of a Digital Literature course (with me talking about XPath, XQuery, XSLT, the CURSUS project as a case study, and a heavily plagiarised presentation on "Whither TEI"). The benefits of hosting the council meeting in Oxford is that Lou, Sebastian and I wouldn't have to travel anywhere. (Though, to be honest, I like going to strange new places...) As with everywhere else, the prices for hotels variehttp://www.oxfordcity.co.uk/index.htmls widely, as I'm sure does the quality of service. All prices are in British Pounds and for a range from the most modest single they provide to an ensuite double. I've taken the prices from their websites and not confirmed them. All are within walking distance of OUCS (especially the historic and prestigious Old Parsonage which is immediately next door). Never having stayed at any of them I know nothing of their general quality. (Perhaps the other Oxford residents may have some opinions on them.) ---- The Old Parsonage 125-190 http://www.oldparsonage-hotel.co.uk/ The Old Bank Hotel 150-240 http://www.oldbank-hotel.co.uk/ The Burlington Hotel 40-85 http://www.burlington-house.co.uk/ The Galaxie Hotel 50-90 http://www.galaxie.co.uk/ The Parklands Hotel 50-84 http://www.oxfordcity.co.uk/hotels/parklands/ ---- Other attractions of Oxford include the University buildings themselves, numerous museums, pubs, and restaurants. See http://www.oxfordcity.co.uk/index.html Oxford is 70 mins (by coach) from Heathrow airport and about an hour on the train from London Paddington railway station. -James --- Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Dec 5 11:30:44 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:30:44 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] next Council meeting (fwd) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41B337B4.3020501@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> To follow up on James' posting, we could host an actual meeting in Oxford in the Computing Services (basic, but free, and completely computerized); or (better) shift the whole shebang to Rewley House, where the meeting was held 2 years ago. They have better meeting rooms than the one we had before, and laid-on coffee/tea/lunch to a decent standard. whether it is appropriate to wait until June just to accomodate me, I have my doubts. Apart from anything else, I doubt if I'll return in a useable state :-} sebastian From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sun Dec 5 12:56:42 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:56:42 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] next Council meeting (fwd) In-Reply-To: <41B337B4.3020501@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41B337B4.3020501@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41B34BDA.2010105@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> If we are reasonably confident about dates and numbers, it might also be possible to get accomodation in one or other of the colleges. Some of them are quite nice, others are merely picturesque... The last time the Council met here I think no-one had any problem making their own accomodation arrangements. The RTS will have an "events officer" in post early next year who could be asked to help if necessary. We can't guarantee to lay on slugs for dinner this time though... The previous meeting held here Sebastian Rahtz wrote: > To follow up on James' posting, we could host an actual meeting in > Oxford in > the Computing Services (basic, but free, and completely computerized); > or (better) shift the whole shebang to Rewley House, where the meeting > was held 2 years ago. They have better meeting rooms than the one > we had before, and laid-on coffee/tea/lunch to a decent standard. > > whether it is appropriate to wait until June just to accomodate > me, I have my doubts. Apart from anything else, I doubt > if I'll return in a useable state :-} > > sebastian > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Tue Dec 7 19:50:16 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 09:50:16 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith In-Reply-To: (Christian Wittern's message of "Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:54:52 +0900") References: Message-ID: Dear Council members, several days have passed without a comment on this draft, so I assume it is endorsed and will send it to John as is. All the best, Christian Christian Wittern writes: > Dear Council members, > > As promised, here is the draft of my reply to John Smith and the > Sanskrit taskforce. Any comments welcome. > > ============================================================ > Dear John, > > At its recent telephone conference, the TEI Council discussed the > proposal you submitted on behalf of the Sanskrit taskforce and I would > like to inform you now of the results. > > The TEI Council welcomed the submission and would like to thank you > and your collaborators for your work at enhancing the TEI > applicability to Sanskrit and other languages that require complex > analytical encoding. > > The TEI Council agreed that the proposed form could be used to encode > this forms for data interchange and that it should be used in the next > version of the Guidelines to illustrate the use the intended > linguistic analysis, as well as the use of within . > > The ensuing discussion centered around how the constraints on the use > of attribute values, that are implicit or in the text of your proposal > could be formalized using a schema language. Several possibilities > were proposed, but none of them could be immediately agreed on. As it > turned out, validation in a very rigid form for a case like this will > require the TEI to review the procedures within the overall framework > of the TEI. > > The last issue, which basically means that no immediate, automatic > validation through a xml parser is available, should be a minor > concern to your group, I think, since the software you are developping > will act as some kind of special-purpose-validator, as its function > will depend on the correct application of the markup. If that does > not sound feasible, a Schematron rule could be used to validate the > markup. > > While the validation procedure is still pending, the TEI Council > thinks the markup as suggested is useful and appropriate and would > like to encourage you to implement it as it stands. > > > All the best, > > Christian Wittern > > Chair, TEI Technical Council > > > ============================================================ > > > -- > > Christian Wittern > Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University > 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From sschreib at umd.edu Tue Dec 7 23:53:44 2004 From: sschreib at umd.edu (Susan Schreibman) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 20:53:44 -0800 Subject: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith References: Message-ID: <001701c4dce1$eb8523a0$6700a8c0@umduwmy7d8ux3d> it sounds like a very fair summary Christian susan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christian Wittern" To: "Christian Wittern" Cc: Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 4:50 PM Subject: Re: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith > > Dear Council members, > > several days have passed without a comment on this draft, so I assume > it is endorsed and will send it to John as is. > > All the best, > > Christian > > Christian Wittern writes: > > > Dear Council members, > > > > As promised, here is the draft of my reply to John Smith and the > > Sanskrit taskforce. Any comments welcome. > > > > ============================================================ > > Dear John, > > > > At its recent telephone conference, the TEI Council discussed the > > proposal you submitted on behalf of the Sanskrit taskforce and I would > > like to inform you now of the results. > > > > The TEI Council welcomed the submission and would like to thank you > > and your collaborators for your work at enhancing the TEI > > applicability to Sanskrit and other languages that require complex > > analytical encoding. > > > > The TEI Council agreed that the proposed form could be used to encode > > this forms for data interchange and that it should be used in the next > > version of the Guidelines to illustrate the use the intended > > linguistic analysis, as well as the use of within . > > > > The ensuing discussion centered around how the constraints on the use > > of attribute values, that are implicit or in the text of your proposal > > could be formalized using a schema language. Several possibilities > > were proposed, but none of them could be immediately agreed on. As it > > turned out, validation in a very rigid form for a case like this will > > require the TEI to review the procedures within the overall framework > > of the TEI. > > > > The last issue, which basically means that no immediate, automatic > > validation through a xml parser is available, should be a minor > > concern to your group, I think, since the software you are developping > > will act as some kind of special-purpose-validator, as its function > > will depend on the correct application of the markup. If that does > > not sound feasible, a Schematron rule could be used to validate the > > markup. > > > > While the validation procedure is still pending, the TEI Council > > thinks the markup as suggested is useful and appropriate and would > > like to encourage you to implement it as it stands. > > > > > > All the best, > > > > Christian Wittern > > > > Chair, TEI Technical Council > > > > > > ============================================================ > > > > > > -- > > > > Christian Wittern > > Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University > > 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN > > _______________________________________________ > > tei-council mailing list > > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > -- > > Christian Wittern > Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University > 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > From nsmith at email.unc.edu Tue Dec 7 21:44:57 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 21:44:57 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith References: Message-ID: <003701c4dccf$e85b8730$6501a8c0@lib.unc.edu> Christian: It's a good thorough summary. And sorry for the delay with replying. best, ns ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christian Wittern" To: "Christian Wittern" Cc: Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 7:50 PM Subject: Re: [tei-council] Draft reply to John Smith > > Dear Council members, > > several days have passed without a comment on this draft, so I assume > it is endorsed and will send it to John as is. > > All the best, > > Christian > > Christian Wittern writes: > > > Dear Council members, > > > > As promised, here is the draft of my reply to John Smith and the > > Sanskrit taskforce. Any comments welcome. > > > > ============================================================ > > Dear John, > > > > At its recent telephone conference, the TEI Council discussed the > > proposal you submitted on behalf of the Sanskrit taskforce and I would > > like to inform you now of the results. > > > > The TEI Council welcomed the submission and would like to thank you > > and your collaborators for your work at enhancing the TEI > > applicability to Sanskrit and other languages that require complex > > analytical encoding. > > > > The TEI Council agreed that the proposed form could be used to encode > > this forms for data interchange and that it should be used in the next > > version of the Guidelines to illustrate the use the intended > > linguistic analysis, as well as the use of within . > > > > The ensuing discussion centered around how the constraints on the use > > of attribute values, that are implicit or in the text of your proposal > > could be formalized using a schema language. Several possibilities > > were proposed, but none of them could be immediately agreed on. As it > > turned out, validation in a very rigid form for a case like this will > > require the TEI to review the procedures within the overall framework > > of the TEI. > > > > The last issue, which basically means that no immediate, automatic > > validation through a xml parser is available, should be a minor > > concern to your group, I think, since the software you are developping > > will act as some kind of special-purpose-validator, as its function > > will depend on the correct application of the markup. If that does > > not sound feasible, a Schematron rule could be used to validate the > > markup. > > > > While the validation procedure is still pending, the TEI Council > > thinks the markup as suggested is useful and appropriate and would > > like to encourage you to implement it as it stands. > > > > > > All the best, > > > > Christian Wittern > > > > Chair, TEI Technical Council > > > > > > ============================================================ > > > > > > -- > > > > Christian Wittern > > Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University > > 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN > > _______________________________________________ > > tei-council mailing list > > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > -- > > Christian Wittern > Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University > 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Wed Dec 8 10:36:31 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 15:36:31 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] licensing of XSLT stylesheets Message-ID: <41B71F7F.7030001@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> As most of you will have seen on TEI-L, Syntext don't want to distribute the XSLT stylesheets I wrote for the Consortium, because they are GPLed. Would the Board politically, and the Council technically, like to tell me to change the license for the next edition of this XSL stuff? In order to protect me from Oxford's rules and regulations, Lou and I have been claiming for some time that the time I spend on the XSLT is working for the TEI, so the consortium holds the copyright. Choices are 1. leave as is, and attempt to educate Syntext about the implications of the GPL 2. create a separate licensing arrangement with Syntext 3. release the next edition under a very liberal BSD-like license my inclination is to 1, but I don't want to put off our fledgling relationship with such people, so 3 may the easiest way out. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Wed Dec 8 21:49:42 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:49:42 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] licensing of XSLT stylesheets In-Reply-To: <41B71F7F.7030001@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> (Sebastian Rahtz's message of "Wed, 08 Dec 2004 15:36:31 +0000") References: <41B71F7F.7030001@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: Sebastian Rahtz writes: > Choices are > > 1. leave as is, and attempt to educate Syntext about the implications > of the GPL > 2. create a separate licensing arrangement with Syntext > 3. release the next edition under a very liberal BSD-like license > > my inclination is to 1, but I don't want to put off our fledgling > relationship > with such people, so 3 may the easiest way out. This is not a Council issue, so just my personal view. (1) would be the best long term solution and should at least be tried. It seems that the understanding of GPL implications is not thorough yet in this case. Also, the requirement to bundle the source code is a non-brainer for XSL:-) Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Thu Dec 9 07:31:06 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 13:31:06 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] request Message-ID: <41B8458A.80904@kantl.be> Dear Fellow Council Members, In May 2004, the Council gathered in the building of the Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature and enjoyed the Academy's amicability and hospitability. I believe we held a successful meeting in the beautiful historical setting of the Academy building. The Flemish Minister of culture now has launched the idea to sell the building of the Royal Academy and relocate the Academy out of its building. The minister is in urgent need of some money and thinks this could be the solution. We protest fiercely against the planned sale of the building and relocation of the Academy which would undoubtedly influence the research currently undertaken at the Academy, i.e. inside the Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies (CTB). The Permanent Secretary of the Academy would like to ask for your support which you can articulate in three ways: 1. You can back up the stance of the Royal Academy , by sending your details (title, name, function, affiliation and address) to reactieverkoop at kantl.be. Or print out the viewpoint, add your title, name, function, affiliation and address, sign it and send it to the Royal Academy at KANTL, Koningstraat 18, b-9000 Gent, Belgium. In either way, your name will be added to the list of people who protest against the plans of the minister of culture at: . 2. You can send or mail a letter of protest to the current Minister of Culture in which you e.g. emphasize the cultural and scholarly role of the Royal Academy, its library, archive and its research centre (Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies). You can contact the Minister of Culture at: Bert Anciaux Flemish Minister of Culture, Youth, Sports and Brussels Chrysalisgebouw - Wetstraat 34-36 b-1040 BRUSSEL Belgium kabinet.anciaux at vlaanderen.be Please make sure you send a copy of your letter to reactieverkoop at kantl.be or to: Prof. dr. Georges De Schutter Permanent Secretary Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 b-9000 Gent Belgium 3. You can send a letter of support to the Permanent Secretary of the Royal Academy wherein you back up the Academy's protest against the plans for sale of the building and relocation of the Academy, and in which you emphasize the importance of the Royal Academy's cultural and scholarly work in an international context. Please send your letters of support/protest, if possible on headed (institutional) notepaper, to: Prof. dr. Georges De Schutter Permanent Secretary Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 b-9000 Gent Belgium Of course you could also mail your letter, addressed to the Permanent Secretary, to reactieverkoop at kantl.be, although letters on paper are prefered for this matter. We would be much obliged if you could consider this request. Sincerely yours, Edward Vanhoutte on behalf of the Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature -- ---------------- Weg met het plan voor de verkoop van het Academiegebouw en de verhuizing van de Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde. Teken de petitie op No to the sale of the building of the Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature and the planned relocation of the Academy. Sign the petition on ================ Edward Vanhoutte Coordinator Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies Associate Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 edward dot vanhoutte at kantl dot be http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Fri Dec 10 13:21:21 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:21:21 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] targe#foo Message-ID: <41B9E921.70401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> In looking to implement @target, I am worried by things like which we currently have. Is that @target to be interpreted as #FOO now? ie are all uses of the target attribute to be interpreted as URIs? -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Fri Dec 10 14:43:27 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:43:27 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] targe#foo In-Reply-To: <41B9E921.70401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41B9E921.70401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <16825.64607.948665.723915@emt.wwp.brown.edu> > ie are all uses of the target attribute to be interpreted as URIs? Not just all uses of target=, but all uses of any attribute that in P4 was declared as IDREF (or IDREFS). Here's a hastily extracted list that I created for Lou shortly after the Members' Meeting; it might not be completely correct, but gives you an idea. resp= of target= of hand= of resp= of hand= of resp= of to= of targets= of from= of to= of from= of to= of scheme= of target= of target= of target= of target= of ana= of class.analysis decls= of class.declaring location= of class.dictionaries mergedin= of class.dictionaries resp= of class.edit target= of class.formPointers lang= of class.global inst= of class.interpret copyOf= of class.linking corresp= of class.linking exclude= of class.linking next= of class.linking prev= of class.linking sameAs= of class.linking select= of class.linking synch= of class.linking domains= of class.pointerGroup hand= of class.readings depPtr= of class.terminology grpPtr= of class.terminology end= of class.timed start= of class.timed scheme= of hand= of resp= of target= of hand= of resp= of hand= of resp= of to= of value= of value= of who= of resp= of fVal= of feats= of hand= of resp= of target= of new= of old= of resp= of children= of follow= of parent= of value= of targets= of scheme= of who= of follow= of parent= of value= of targets= of target= of perf= of who= of adj= of adjFrom= of adjTo= of value= of target= of targetEnd= of code= of scheme= of target= of who= of target= of target= of active= of passive= of target= of hand= of resp= of children= of value= of who= of who= of code= of scheme= of who= of from= of to= of hand= of target= of target= of render= of perf= of origin= of value= of who= of hand= of who= of since= of target= of script= of who= of From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Fri Dec 10 15:22:19 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:22:19 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] targe#foo In-Reply-To: <16825.64607.948665.723915@emt.wwp.brown.edu> References: <41B9E921.70401@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <16825.64607.948665.723915@emt.wwp.brown.edu> Message-ID: <41BA057B.7080509@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Syd Bauman wrote: >Not just all uses of target=, but all uses of any attribute that in >P4 was declared as IDREF (or IDREFS). > > > yikes. you've just depressed me. more work than I had realized. I hate this stupid HTML system of "foo" matching "#foo", so that you always have to strip off the first character of things. oh well. -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Fri Dec 17 21:07:31 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:07:31 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting Message-ID: Dear Council members, Scheduling of meetings is notoriously difficult, but I will give it another try. I will list up the options that have been surfacing so far and hope that a show of hands somehow narrows them down. 1) Time Sebastian is unavailable April to mid-June. If we want to work around this, it could be either before or after: * End of March * Second half of June Otherwise, we could stary with our usual timing of mid-of-May (with a bit of flexibility, end of April has also been suggested. 2) Place We have I think heard three offers, Oxford, Copenhagen and Maryland. If we take the late June option, I would propose hold it in conjunction with ACH/ALLC, preferable after the conference. Personally, I would not want to miss either Sebastian nor ACH/ALLC, so the last option would be most convenient for me, but that is just one vote. So I would now like to formally ask all members of the Council for next year to express their preferences. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From pwillett at umich.edu Sat Dec 18 12:59:33 2004 From: pwillett at umich.edu (Perry Willett) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 12:59:33 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000301c4e52b$575af630$922bd38d@CLUBSODA> I also offered to host the next TEI Council meeting in Ann Arbor. Perry Willett University of Michigan pwillett at umich.edu -----Original Message----- From: tei-council-bounces at lists.village.Virginia.EDU [mailto:tei-council-bounces at lists.village.Virginia.EDU] On Behalf Of Christian Wittern Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 9:08 PM To: tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting Dear Council members, Scheduling of meetings is notoriously difficult, but I will give it another try. I will list up the options that have been surfacing so far and hope that a show of hands somehow narrows them down. 1) Time Sebastian is unavailable April to mid-June. If we want to work around this, it could be either before or after: * End of March * Second half of June Otherwise, we could stary with our usual timing of mid-of-May (with a bit of flexibility, end of April has also been suggested. 2) Place We have I think heard three offers, Oxford, Copenhagen and Maryland. If we take the late June option, I would propose hold it in conjunction with ACH/ALLC, preferable after the conference. Personally, I would not want to miss either Sebastian nor ACH/ALLC, so the last option would be most convenient for me, but that is just one vote. So I would now like to formally ask all members of the Council for next year to express their preferences. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council From James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Sat Dec 18 13:06:12 2004 From: James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (James Cummings) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:06:12 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Christian Wittern wrote: > If we take the late June option, I would propose hold it in > conjunction with ACH/ALLC, preferable after the conference. > > Personally, I would not want to miss either Sebastian nor ACH/ALLC, so > the last option would be most convenient for me, but that is just one > vote. I like this idea, could I ask how many members of the Council were intending already to go to ACH/ALLC? I've submitted a paper proposal, but like others won't discover whether this has been accepted until 7 Feb. 2005. > So I would now like to formally ask all members of the Council for > next year to express their preferences. My preferences would be in the order of ACH/ALLC, Copenhagen, Oxford. -James --- Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk From sschreib at umd.edu Sat Dec 18 21:14:52 2004 From: sschreib at umd.edu (Susan Schreibman) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:14:52 -0800 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting References: Message-ID: <000901c4e570$8c3073e0$0301a8c0@umduwmy7d8ux3d> John, Alex, and myself are all part of the teiPublisher team, and we are planning on having our first face to face meeting after the ACH-ALLC (we are working on a $0 budget, and it is the first time all of us will be in the same place at the same time). We can't meet before the conference as Amit and myself are teaching on the summer school. We'll also need a day to a day and a half for the teiPublisher meeting, which won't start until Sunday, or perhaps Monday. And I'm sure Alex and myself would prefer to not have any meetings Saturday afternoon as we'll both be working through the summer school and the conference. If we can manage to have both meetings after ACH/ALLC, that would be fine with me. If not, perhaps Oxford in March or early July. Susan ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Cummings" To: "Christian Wittern" Cc: Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [tei-council] Next Council meeting > On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Christian Wittern wrote: > > > If we take the late June option, I would propose hold it in > > conjunction with ACH/ALLC, preferable after the conference. > > > > Personally, I would not want to miss either Sebastian nor ACH/ALLC, so > > the last option would be most convenient for me, but that is just one > > vote. > > I like this idea, could I ask how many members of the Council were > intending already to go to ACH/ALLC? I've submitted a paper proposal, > but like others won't discover whether this has been accepted until > 7 Feb. 2005. > > > So I would now like to formally ask all members of the Council for > > next year to express their preferences. > > My preferences would be in the order of ACH/ALLC, Copenhagen, Oxford. > > -James > > --- > Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford > James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Sun Dec 19 18:18:00 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:18:00 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <000901c4e570$8c3073e0$0301a8c0@umduwmy7d8ux3d> (Susan Schreibman's message of "Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:14:52 -0800") References: <000901c4e570$8c3073e0$0301a8c0@umduwmy7d8ux3d> Message-ID: "Susan Schreibman" writes: > John, Alex, and myself are all part of the teiPublisher team, and we are > planning on having our first face to face meeting after the ACH-ALLC (we are > working on a $0 budget, and it is the first time all of us will be in the > same place at the same time). We can't meet before the conference as Amit > and myself are teaching on the summer school. > > We'll also need a day to a day and a half for the teiPublisher meeting, > which won't start until Sunday, or perhaps Monday. And I'm sure Alex and > myself would prefer to not have any meetings Saturday afternoon as we'll > both be working through the summer school and the conference. > > If we can manage to have both meetings after ACH/ALLC, that would be fine > with me. If not, perhaps Oxford in March or early July. > It still looks to me like post-ACH/ALLC would be the most viable option; and I hope the teiPublisher meeting is not a show stopper. How many people are involved in that meeting? Could you possible wait until Tuesday so that we can have the Council meeting Sunday/Monday. I admit that is quite a tight scheduling and I personally would not mind hold the TEI Council meeting off for two days until Tuesday, but I am afraid there are many busy people on the Council... All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Julia_Flanders at Brown.Edu Mon Dec 20 09:54:00 2004 From: Julia_Flanders at Brown.Edu (Flanders, Julia) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 09:54:00 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting Message-ID: <1A97D3D73A03FC419D87967D3CE4760C0286C0C0@MAIL1.AD.Brown.Edu> I'll be teaching at the summer institute before ACH/ALLC, so having a meeting after the conference would stretch things out quite a bit. I guess I'd be willing if that's everyone's preferred option (and it would save the TEI some travel money). I have to be in the UK in early July for a conference, so the Oxford/early July option would be convenient for me. Other than that, I don't have any strong preferences. Julia -----Original Message----- From: tei-council-bounces at lists.village.Virginia.EDU on behalf of Christian Wittern Sent: Sun 12/19/04 18:18 To: Susan Schreibman Cc: tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU Subject: Re: [tei-council] Next Council meeting "Susan Schreibman" writes: > John, Alex, and myself are all part of the teiPublisher team, and we are > planning on having our first face to face meeting after the ACH-ALLC (we are > working on a $0 budget, and it is the first time all of us will be in the > same place at the same time). We can't meet before the conference as Amit > and myself are teaching on the summer school. > > We'll also need a day to a day and a half for the teiPublisher meeting, > which won't start until Sunday, or perhaps Monday. And I'm sure Alex and > myself would prefer to not have any meetings Saturday afternoon as we'll > both be working through the summer school and the conference. > > If we can manage to have both meetings after ACH/ALLC, that would be fine > with me. If not, perhaps Oxford in March or early July. > It still looks to me like post-ACH/ALLC would be the most viable option; and I hope the teiPublisher meeting is not a show stopper. How many people are involved in that meeting? Could you possible wait until Tuesday so that we can have the Council meeting Sunday/Monday. I admit that is quite a tight scheduling and I personally would not mind hold the TEI Council meeting off for two days until Tuesday, but I am afraid there are many busy people on the Council... All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN _______________________________________________ tei-council mailing list tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council From sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Dec 20 09:59:44 2004 From: sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:59:44 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41C6E8E0.4030006@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> FWIW, I would not normally attend ACH/ALLC. I don't think you should change the dates for one person, however well-dressed, suave and amusing that person may be; so I'd still suggest you stick with April. Sebastian From lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk Mon Dec 20 11:18:01 2004 From: lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk (Lou Burnard) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:18:01 +0000 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <41C6E8E0.4030006@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41C6E8E0.4030006@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> My experience has always been that scheduling meetings back to back, in particular in tandem with a major conference, is utterly exhausting and thus unprofitable. On those grounds alone I don't think having the Council meeting tagged on to ACHALLC would be such a smart move, with or without the dapper presence of my esteemed colleague. I also think that we have a lot of work to report to the council already and there should be plenty more by April. So my vote (not that I have one) is for April. If people are tired of Oxford or wary of Copenhagen, I believe Nancy is also nice in the spring, and not at all expensive. Sebastian Rahtz wrote: > FWIW, I would not normally attend ACH/ALLC. > > I don't think you should change the dates for one person, however > well-dressed, suave and amusing that person may be; so I'd still suggest > you stick with April. > > Sebastian > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be Mon Dec 20 11:43:06 2004 From: edward.vanhoutte at kantl.be (Edward Vanhoutte) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:43:06 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41C6E8E0.4030006@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <41C7011A.1030404@kantl.be> I agree with Lou on this one. Edward Lou Burnard wrote: > My experience has always been that scheduling meetings back to back, in > particular in tandem with a major conference, is utterly exhausting and > thus unprofitable. On those grounds alone I don't think having the > Council meeting tagged on to ACHALLC would be such a smart move, with or > without the dapper presence of my esteemed colleague. > > I also think that we have a lot of work to report to the council already > and there should be plenty more by April. So my vote (not that I have > one) is for April. If people are tired of Oxford or wary of Copenhagen, > I believe Nancy is also nice in the spring, and not at all expensive. > > > > Sebastian Rahtz wrote: > >> FWIW, I would not normally attend ACH/ALLC. >> >> I don't think you should change the dates for one person, however >> well-dressed, suave and amusing that person may be; so I'd still >> suggest you stick with April. >> >> Sebastian >> _______________________________________________ >> tei-council mailing list >> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU >> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council >> > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > -- ---------------- Weg met het plan voor de verkoop van het Academiegebouw en de verhuizing van de Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde. Teken de petitie op No to the sale of the building of the Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature and the planned relocation of the Academy. Sign the petition on ================ Edward Vanhoutte Coordinator Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies Associate Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 edward dot vanhoutte at kantl dot be http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm From Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu Mon Dec 20 13:49:08 2004 From: Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu (Syd Bauman) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:49:08 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <41C7011A.1030404@kantl.be> References: <41C6E8E0.4030006@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41C7011A.1030404@kantl.be> Message-ID: <16839.7844.477534.803100@emt.wwp.brown.edu> > I agree with Lou on this one. As do I. From nsmith at email.unc.edu Mon Dec 20 17:34:28 2004 From: nsmith at email.unc.edu (Natasha Smith) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:34:28 -0500 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting References: <41C6E8E0.4030006@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk><41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41C7011A.1030404@kantl.be> Message-ID: <01c001c4e6e4$116e74c0$6501a8c0@lib.unc.edu> after looking at my calendar and thinking about all pros and cons, I say: 1. I will be at ach and will be able to stay after it for two more days. 2. I can meet in April (would like to know more specifically) 3. I think Sebastian's presence would be VERY needed, however.... 4. I am not sure that the "business" can wait until end of June-July - we have too many unsolved issues and too many pressing deadlines 5. re: meeting place. I am open to all suggestions (Oxford, Nancy, Ann Arbor, Baltimore, did I miss anything else?), but I think we should look closer to the economics, i.e. travel $$$, more specifically tickets. best, ns ----- Original Message ----- From: "Edward Vanhoutte" To: "Lou Burnard" Cc: Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 11:43 AM Subject: Re: [tei-council] Next Council meeting > I agree with Lou on this one. > > Edward > > Lou Burnard wrote: > > > My experience has always been that scheduling meetings back to back, in > > particular in tandem with a major conference, is utterly exhausting and > > thus unprofitable. On those grounds alone I don't think having the > > Council meeting tagged on to ACHALLC would be such a smart move, with or > > without the dapper presence of my esteemed colleague. > > > > I also think that we have a lot of work to report to the council already > > and there should be plenty more by April. So my vote (not that I have > > one) is for April. If people are tired of Oxford or wary of Copenhagen, > > I believe Nancy is also nice in the spring, and not at all expensive. > > > > > > > > Sebastian Rahtz wrote: > > > >> FWIW, I would not normally attend ACH/ALLC. > >> > >> I don't think you should change the dates for one person, however > >> well-dressed, suave and amusing that person may be; so I'd still > >> suggest you stick with April. > >> > >> Sebastian > >> _______________________________________________ > >> tei-council mailing list > >> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > >> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > tei-council mailing list > > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > > > -- > > ---------------- > Weg met het plan voor de verkoop van het Academiegebouw en de verhuizing > van de Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde. Teken > de petitie op > > No to the sale of the building of the Royal Academy of Dutch Language > and Literature and the planned relocation of the Academy. Sign the > petition on > > ================ > Edward Vanhoutte > Coordinator > Centrum voor Teksteditie en Bronnenstudie - CTB (KANTL) > Centre for Scholarly Editing and Document Studies > Associate Editor, Literary and Linguistic Computing > Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde > Royal Academy of Dutch Language and Literature > Koningstraat 18 / b-9000 Gent / Belgium > tel: +32 9 265 93 51 / fax: +32 9 265 93 49 > edward dot vanhoutte at kantl dot be > http://www.kantl.be/ctb/ > http://www.kantl.be/ctb/vanhoutte/ > http://www.kantl.be/ctb/staff/edward.htm > > _______________________________________________ > tei-council mailing list > tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU > http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > From wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp Mon Dec 20 20:31:08 2004 From: wittern at kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Christian Wittern) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:31:08 +0900 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <01c001c4e6e4$116e74c0$6501a8c0@lib.unc.edu> (Natasha Smith's message of "Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:34:28 -0500") References: <41C6E8E0.4030006@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41C7011A.1030404@kantl.be> <01c001c4e6e4$116e74c0$6501a8c0@lib.unc.edu> Message-ID: Dear Council members, Most voices raised so far are more or less against a meeting in conjunction with ACH/ALLC, which is fine with me, so we drop that option. May I then suggest that we look at a meeting in March or April? As to the meeting place and economic considerations (travel and lodging for council members), I looks to me like Oxford would be the likely winner, with Nancy and Copenhagen run-ups -- at least my experience so far has been that hotels in the States tend to be more expensive then in Europe, on top of that the total travel costs would likely be less. On the other hand, we have held all Council meetings so far in Europe (London, Oxford, Ghent) and for our colleagues from the States, Ann Arbor or Maryland would certainly be more convenient. Given the fact that all members do their work voluntarily, such non-economic considerations should also play a role. I wonder if somebody (Syd?) could give us some hard figures to ponder in addition to this? As to ticket cost, for me a trip to Europe would be about US $200 less than a trip to the east cost of the US. All the best, Christian -- Christian Wittern Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN From Laurent.Romary at loria.fr Tue Dec 21 03:28:04 2004 From: Laurent.Romary at loria.fr (Laurent Romary) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:28:04 +0100 Subject: [tei-council] Next Council meeting In-Reply-To: <41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> References: <41C6E8E0.4030006@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> <41C6FB39.1030301@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> Message-ID: <3C11BB36-532A-11D9-92F6-000A95CDDDE6@loria.fr> Le 20 d?c. 04, ? 17:18, Lou Burnard a ?crit : > My experience has always been that scheduling meetings back to back, > in particular in tandem with a major conference, is utterly exhausting > and thus unprofitable. On those grounds alone I don't think having the > Council meeting tagged on to ACHALLC would be such a smart move, with > or without the dapper presence of my esteemed colleague. > > I also think that we have a lot of work to report to the council > already and there should be plenty more by April. So my vote (not that > I have one) is for April. If people are tired of Oxford or wary of > Copenhagen, I believe Nancy is also nice in the spring, and not at all > expensive. > As a matter of fact, there is no difficulty in organizing a council meeting either in Nancy or in Paris (at AFNOR), which may even be more central (close to CDG airport). But I have no prejudice as to the place in general. Best Laurent