[tei-council] TEI Conformance

[Syd Bauman]

> It is true that a document is or is not valid against a given
> schema. However, it is not true that a document is only valid
> against one schema; it can be valid against schema A and invalid
> against schema B.
> 
> Similarly, a document may TEI Conformant against one Conformance
> Profile, and not confirmant against another Profile.
> 
> Is that language acceptable? James' words define a series of TEI
> Profiles against which you can check your conformance.

That's a really good question. My gut instinct is "no", it would be a
bad idea to have multiple conformance profiles. But I'm certainly
willing to think about it. But more importantly, where does this come
from? Do you mean James' lovely post "TEI Conformance" that started
this thread on 2006-11-21T16:28Z? It does not discuss conformance
profiles or levels of interchangeability. It says a "TEI-conformant
TEI P5 document must validate against a schema derived from the TEI
Guidelines." It then goes on to give names to a variety of different
models of schema-creation with respect to the Guidelines. That is
all. I'm quite happy with that. Any project that does the right thing
(i.e., creates their extensions in ODD properly, uses TEI elements as
intended, has minimal header stuff, etc.) can claim conformance and
get their funding. Any project that wants to go further and say "our
schema is a 'renaming subset' schema" can go ahead and do so.

OK, I *really* gotta go ...