[tei-council] conformance draft

[Sebastian Rahtz]

Syd Bauman wrote:
> statement is, I think, necessary. And it isn't trivial. E.g.,
> Roma-the-web-app often produces ODD files that are invalid with
> respect to the schema that I would expect them to be valid against.
> (Currently the 0.6 version of P5/p5odds.rnc, available at
> http://www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/custom/schema/relaxng/p5odds.rnc.)
>   
if you get an ODD which is not valid, I need to know!
that would be a bug.

the Exemplar "tei_odds" is the expected target for
validation/
>
> Two: Exemplars
> ---- ---------
> I feel that too much weight is placed on the TEI Customization
> Exemplars,
i kind of agree that they come over too prominent.
> SVG) or to be good starting points for customization, but are not
> intended to generate schemas that are useful for encoding, and
> indeed, they don't. Most obviously, they do not provide controlled
> vocabularies for data.enumerated attributes.
>   
bit like TEI P1, P2, P3, and P4, then....?
>
> Furthermore, I think it is important to explain that DTD validation
> will not inform a user about as many constraints as will Relax NG
> validation. (E.g., many attribute values have datatypes that provide
> useful constraints in RelaxNG-land, but are just CDATA in DTD-land.)
>   
thats very true; wording this will not be easy, I think.
>
> Four: namespace of new elements
> ----- --------- -- --- --------
> I am not at all sure it is a good idea that TEI require that new
> elements be in a separate namespace.

I tend to agree, though I quite see the argument of James.

-- 
Sebastian Rahtz      

Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431