[tei-council] conformance draft

[James Cummings]

Christian Wittern wrote:
> Syd Bauman wrote:
>> Apologies, I'm not entirely up-to-date on this thread, but ...
>>
>>> I was intentionally being hard-line dictatorial and stating that
>>> TEI Conformance requires there to have been an ODD at some point to
>>> generate the schema.
>> I recall that Council expressed a pretty strong opinion on this at
>> the 2005 meeting in Paris, although I don't know if it was an
>> official vote or not. The overwhelming majority thought that ODD
>> should be the only way to go.
> At least for conformant documents, that was my impression as well. And I
> still think this is the way it should be.

Good.  Is anyone disagreeing that for Conformance there must have been, at
some point, a TEI ODD?  (i.e. even if the user is using a tei_lite schema,
that was originally an ODD).

>>> I am now thinking that the sensible thing would be to simply axe
>>> all the discussion of parameter entities etc. and simply say how to
>>> do the job with an ODD. Do we agree?
>> I don't think any discussion of parameter entities is warranted.
>> *Maybe* instructions for stitching together a Relax NG schema. Maybe.
> We should let go of both, IMHO.  P5 is a radical break, part of the 21st
> century and the future, and DTD are soo 90s.

I don't think we need instructions for stitching together a Relax NG
schema, although there should be discussion of Relax in the Modification
section.

> I don't think (b) needs to be mentioned somewhere.  If we do it right,
> most people (except Wendell) will not feel the need to hack the Schemas.

Yes, there are some people who will always do such things, but they know
enough to recognise that they are 'going off the reservation'.  With other
guidelines/standards, if you took one part of it and ignored how it was
meant to be done and did it an entirely different way, you'd recognise that
you might not have support, interoperability, or 'certification' or
whatnot.  ODD is the way this is meant to be done, so I don't think we
should be shy about stating it.

>> Furthermore, if you wanna use a DTD we should make it very clear and
>> abundantly explicit that you are not getting a lot of the validation
>> that you would get if you were using Relax NG.
> +1
<aol>Me Too</aol>

-James
-- 
Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford
James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk