[tei-council] Conformance .... the continuing saga

Sebastian Rahtz sebastian.rahtz at oucs.ox.ac.uk
Sat Apr 14 08:33:32 EDT 2007


James Cummings wrote:
>
> I feel this is optional but nice -- does it take much effort to 
> produce them?  Yes they can be used as you describe below, but I don't 
> think that is reason to no produce them if this is done automatically.
The modules were, until recently, what we regarded
as the primary output of the Guidelines. The "compiled
schema" came later. So, yes, the work is all done.
>
> I'm ambivalent about that.  If it is a pain to do, then let's not, 
> knowing Wohann's skills I'm sure he could do this himself, 
when someone writes the first non-Consortium ODD processor,
oh frabjous day.

So my critical question is whether the form of the
generated schema and DTD fragments is normative
or merely indicative.  Can I break the format
at P5.1?

In case anyone is wondering, it really is not that obvious
what to model in the RELAX NG schemas. CUrrently
I say

 foo = foo.content, foo.attributes

because that lets you say

 foo.attributes = empty

but I could equally say

 foo = foo.content, attribute bar ( text)

and miss out the intermediate stage.

-- 
Sebastian Rahtz      

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




More information about the tei-council mailing list