[tei-council] Agenda item?

Dan O'Donnell daniel.odonnell at uleth.ca
Wed Jan 17 13:52:42 EST 2007


On Wed, 2007-17-01 at 18:37 +0000, Lou Burnard wrote:
> Well, afaik the procedure for proposing changes to TEI P5 is like this: 
> You write a feature request and send it to the sourceforge site. The 
> editors review the list of outstanding requests and make proposals to 
> council as to their disposition. Council then agrees (or not) and the 
> change gets made (or not); or council can suggest there should be a new 
> work item.
> 
> Since you say you didnt want to talk about the procedure, but rather 
> about choice  -- why not write that feature request?

Sure, if that's how we do it. I'll just follow the model used to get the
DIV business we've been discussing added to the agenda (I thought I had
been). Since this is a current topic that has apparently gone through a
similar process, I'll presumably have no trouble taking it as my model. 

I also didn't actually say I didn't want to talk about procedure. I
called it a secondary issue for me next to my interest in choice. If
we've got one, then so be it.

-dan


> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Dan O'Donnell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-17-01 at 18:52 +0000, Lou Burnard wrote:
> >   
> >> Dan O'Donnell wrote:
> >>     
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I have a topic that I hesitantly mention: tei:choice. My own conviction
> >>> is that we have too narrow a content model for the element. But I
> >>> understand that it may be too late to revisit the question?
> >>>
> >>> I've been asking around to find a consensus on when an element of P5 has
> >>> been "decided" and only minor modifications are considered possible, but
> >>> we apparently don't have one.
> >>>       
> >> I seem to have missed out on this "asking around": were you seeking 
> >> Council's opinion on the procedural issue of when/how element 
> >> definitions get fixed, or on the specific technical issue of whether the 
> >> current proposal for the content model of <choice> needs attention?
> >>
> >>     
> >>> If anybody thinks this is worth discussing at this telco or the next, I
> >>> can prepare something.
> >>>
> >>>       
> >> On which topic?
> >>     
> >
> > The one I labelled as "a topic" above: tei:choice. The "asking around"
> > about procedure, as the expression suggests, was informal and so didn't
> > involve more than a couple of casual email exchanges with some old TEI
> > hands in the course of other business: before proposing that we revisit
> > choice, I thought I better check if it was maybe too late or if there
> > was a procedure to indicate that certain topics were now closed or open.
> >
> > The answer I got back each time was that there seemed not to be a formal
> > process in place covering this at council. It was suggested to me that
> > the procedural aspect might be worth discussing at council as well,
> > though that's at best a secondary interest of mine here. We seem to be
> > doing all right on the whole and I'm just interested in choice.
> >
> > -dan
> >
> >   
> >>     
> >>> -dan
> >>>       
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> tei-council mailing list
> >> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> >> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
> >>     
> 
-- 
Daniel Paul O'Donnell, PhD
Chair, Text Encoding Initiative <http://www.tei-c.org/>
Director, Digital Medievalist Project <http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/>
Associate Professor and Chair of English
University of Lethbridge
Lethbridge AB T1K 3M4
Vox: +1 403 329 2378
Fax: +1 403 382-7191
Homepage: http://people.uleth.ca/~daniel.odonnell/




More information about the tei-council mailing list