[tei-council] datatype issues (part 1)

[James Cummings]

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> Lou Burnard wrote:
> 
> 
>>My argument is that iff we are going to go to the trouble of
>>normalising attribute values, and there is a pre-existing
>>international norm, then we really have to have much better reasons
>>not to follow it than to say "it's not intuitive".
> 
> my sentiments exactly.....

Yup.  I'm convinced.  Ok, so we have sex="1" and value="P36Y"?  I 
don't mind having a local modification have male/female/unknown and 
transform it to 1/2/0 if I ever encounter it as a problem.  The 
benefit of having attribute values being international standards does 
seem to outweigh any other benefit of knowing at a glance what that 
value means.  I'm assuming that when slightly cryptic ISO standards 
like this are use for attribute values that there will be a 
(simplified) discussion of it in the guidelines and perhaps a pointer 
to further information on it?

-James