[tei-council] notes from this morning's call

[Lou Burnard]

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?