[tei-council] MD chapter revised: namespace rules
James.Cummings at oucs.ox.ac.uk
Tue Apr 10 08:13:19 EDT 2007
Lou Burnard wrote:
> Inter alia, and as a straw man, I'd like to propose for discussion the
> following draconian rules about the use of namespaces in modification:
> 1. New elements may not be placed in the TEI namespace
I can agree with that, though we may disagree on what is a 'new' element.
> 2. If new attributes are added to a TEI element, the resulting element
> must be moved out of the TEI namespace.
I'm not convinced by that. If I add a new attribute to a TEI element, the
TEI element is still a TEI element. It just has a new attribute and that
attribute is signalled as not being part of the TEI by itself being in a
different namespace. my:newAtt="foo". I don't see that the element is now
so changed that it is no longer the TEI element.
> 3. Only modified elements which have undergone a clean modification 
> may remain in the TEI namespace.
Agreed, but I think adding an attribute which is in a different namespace
is a clean modification. You are right that changed content models, etc.
are dirty changes. However, if the change is to remove an element from
some classes, or limit an open attribute value list, or anything similar
which constrains it, then that is a clean modification because the TEI
content still validates against tei_all.
> 4. If a TEI element is renamed, it may not remain in the TEI namespace,
> except that TEI namespaces are defined for systematic renaming of TEI
> elements into different languages.
I'm still not convinced that TEI translations need separate namespaces.
They should be conformant according to the Renaming Subset schema. If
something is simply a renamed element/attribute and it otherwise is
identical to the TEI original (and documented with ODD/equiv) then I do not
feel it needs to be in a different namespace. It is, for all intents and
purposes, the TEI element. If I have <div type="chapter"> and instead
rename this <chapter> keeping everything else the same, does this really
need a new namespace? The original view of the Renaming Subset was that it
> A "clean" modification is defined in chapter MD as one which results
> in a schema that matches a proper subset of the documents matched by an
> unmodified schema.
I think clean should include reversal of renamings, and that translations
are just a specialised form of renamings.
> Comments? Alternative proposals?
1. Entirely new elements should be in a new namespace
2. Renamed elements, properly documented should remain in TEI namespace
3. Translations are just a form of renaming.
4. Adding new (namespaced) attributes to a TEI element, does not stop that
TEI element being TEI.
5. Our definition of 'clean' modification should include renamings.
Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford
James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk
More information about the tei-council