[tei-council] notes from today's conference call

[Syd Bauman]

Sebastian Rahtz writes:

> "Concern was expressed over the general concept of permitting TEI
> datatypes to further constrain or relax underlying W3C datatypes.
> However, the opposite point of view, that it is important not to be
> straight-jacketed by a single set of datatypes primarily intended
> for business applications, was also expressed."
> 
> I am not sure this reflects the discussion. Perhaps
> 
> "Concern was expressed over the use of regexp-based extensions to
> W3C datatypes, particularly in the duration datatype. There was
> disagreement about the general principle of whether or not the TEI
> should force itself to stick to strict W3C datatypes, but it was
> clear that the issue required more discussion".
> 
> but perhaps my rewording is as biased towards my viewpoint as Syd's
> wording is biased towards his :-}

Oh dear. You're quite right -- if read as including <valList>s my
description of your position makes you sound like a madman. My
apologies.

You did express it as a general concern, and then focused in on the
regexps, particularly on tei.data.duration.[1] Would you prefer we
just focused in on the pattern, perhaps of duration, for the minutes?
In either case, we may as well use the correct terminology:

  Concern was expressed over the use of W3C 'pattern' facets,
  particularly in the datatype 'tei.data.duration'. There was
  disagreement about the general principle of whether or not the TEI
  should force itself to stick to strict W3C datatypes, but it was
  clear that the issue required more discussion.

Would that do?


Note
----
[1] But I was presuming that was merely an example, as there are a
    half-dozen datatypes that are restricted by regexps. On the other
    hand, as mentioned in a previous discussion, I have to admit I
    don't really *like* the pattern I came up with for duration,
    whereas I think I like all the others.