[tei-council] First draft of TC M 22, notes from Friday's call, are up

[Christian Wittern]

Syd Bauman <Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu> writes:

>
>> I don't think this represents the discussion accurately. The idea
>> was to request Council members (individually or as groups) to
>> volunteer to "adopt" a module or two for classificatory activity,
>> having first checked out the current state of play in edw84. They
>> should then then send their suggestions to CW, who would publish a
>> definitive set of assignments in consultation with LB.
>
> You're quite right, I forgot the "folks are supposed to state which
> module they'd like to adopt" part. But I guess I'm a bit confused:
> are Council members supposed to volunteer for a module by going
> through EDW84? Weren't you and Christian going to provide a concise
> list of modules and a rough guestimate of how much work each needed
> for Council members to use in deciding which module they'd like to
> adopt? (I thought CW said he'd do that, and you said you'd help as,
> now that you've put in all this effort on ST, you've a good notion of
> how much work each module is likely to require .)

I am with Lou here.  The discussion ended with the suggestion that we
take the list Syd provided on 2005-12-31 and ask Council members to
articulate for which of these modules they would like to investigate
and suggest improvements in light of The P5 Way of Doing Things(TM) to
their class structure.

>
>> These tasks need to be done fairly quickly, and I thought we had
>> agreed on some dates, but I foolishly didn't write them down.
>
> I did, though. "1 week" for whatever the intermediate stage was, and
> "the next week" for completing the adoption process, which is why I
> wrote it down as 2006-03-11.

Indeed.  So please send me lists of modules you are interested in. The
first week was to collect the wishlist, the second week to digest them
and send out the assignments, at least that was my understanding.

>
> What I wish we had done is also hammer out a date by which module
> adopters should post their suggestions -- 2006-03-25?

Fine with me.  That is pretty optimistic though.  

>> "however, he does not want to post it to TEI-L until these
>> formatting problems have been fixed." I don't remember Matthew
>> saying that. Did he? The formatting doesnt look so dusty to me --
>> it's quite readable anyway!
>
> Yes, he did. But now that I've taken a more careful look at it, I'm
> with Lou -- while it may not be perfect, it's not that bad. No one
> expects tables that need to be that wide and contain all sorts of
> markup like that to look wonderful, anyway.

It shows some funny Kanji characters when I look at that page in my
system here.  I was assuming Matthew wanted to get rid of those first.


>> - Under P5, I would like the record to show that I specifically
>> apologised for not having produced a progress report for this
>> meeting and promisedn to circulate one for inclusion in the
>> minutes. Which I did.
>
> And did very rapidly, I will let everyone know. I've included a
> statement to this effect in the first para under "P5", let me know if
> it's satisfactory.

Thanks Syd, the notes look fine to me,

Christian

-- 

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