[tei-council] Datatype : roundup

[Christian Wittern]

Lou Burnard <lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> writes:

> Rather than repeat with comment all the last few days messages, here
> is my take on where I think we now are.
>
> 1. No-one has dissented from the basic objective of providing tei
>    datatypes which together cover the full range of current
>    requirements as identified in Syd's edw90 table. There has been
>    debate chiefly where the requirements identified there don't map
>    tidily on to existing W3C datatypes.
>
> 2. Here are my proposals for resolving the currently debated issues:
>
> a. tei.data.notation : renamed as tei.data.pattern and explicitly tied
> to regular  expression syntax [some debate is needed on how we define
> this: syd's original proposal suggested we should support only the W3C
> rather restricted version of regexps, i.e. the pattern has to be
> "anchored". Is that OK, or are we supporting apache-style
> perl-compatible regexps? or just the original syntax built into grep
> (but not egrep)?]

Why on earth has nobody yet tought of standardizing regexes?  You
surely to not have to worry about truncated timezones there...

However, thinking of implementation in validators, it probably it the
only viable option to go with the W3C.

>
> b. split the currently defined tei.data.name into two: tei.data.ident
> and tei.data.name  -- the former is used for those cases where the
> name concerned *must* be an XML-compatible name and maps to xsd:Name ;
> the latter for names of any kind excluding spaces (mapping to
> NMTOKEN?)
>
> c. add a pattern to the list of alternatives proposed for
> tei.data.temporal which  supports  right-truncated times (just don't
> say i didnt tell you it'll all end in tears)

Please, please do so!!

> d. define  tei.data.probability as a value between 0 and 1 only

+1

>
> -- the list of datatypes proposed is adequate to our needs (as
>    summarized in edw90)
> -- the definitions for them proposed are reasonably comprehensible and
>    adequate
>

I see you folded this already into "The Guidelines", but probably
something went wrong during the conversion, there are things like
attributes on <> and some quotes also seem amiss.

Apart from that and apart from the fact that this is like looking at a
list of words and then asking "Is this all you will ever need to talk
to each other", it seems sufficient to this tired brain.

All the best,

Christian

-- 
 Christian Wittern 
 Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN