[tei-council] oversimplification: <measure> isn't measured

[Syd Bauman]

I have a very strong feeling we are talking at cross purposes, here.
So let me reiterate the important points:

* The <measure> element should have a quantity= attribute, not
  extent= (and preferably not count=, although that's a lot better
  than extent=).

* Either someone should do some work deciding what scope= means for a
  generic <measure>, or it shouldn't have a scope= attribute.

* The "suggested values include" list for unit= of <measure> should
  be pretty much as all-encompassing as we can get it.

I do not see how to reconcile these needs with the attribute needs of
the three special purpose measurements, <height>, <width>, and
<depth>,
* which should not have commodity=
* which should have scope=
* for which extent= is as good as quantity=
* for which the "suggested values include" list should be very
  limited
without having separate attribute classes.


Perhaps I'll post later about the less important <measureGrp> bits
later.