[tei-council] <specGrp> and <specGrpRef> formatting

[Arianna Ciula]

James Cummings wrote:

> At very least we should
> get rid of the number.  This is just a generated number, and has no real
> meaning to the reader. 

Agree

  Another option is to, in presentation form on,
> as a final division to each chapter have a section where all of these 
> are dealt with at once, once per module/chapter, rather than having them 
> spread throughout the chapter.

I think this is a good idea, but I am not sure how feasible it is given 
the short time we have and more urgent priorities. Indeed, it seems to 
me that every chapter has a slightly different structure that would make 
this task rather time consuming. The editors know better.

Arianna



> As there is often prose which introduces the specGrpRefs and specGrps, 
> there would need to be editorial changes to this, and the editors have 
> been tasked with removing this regardless. (We should be able to 
> automate the addition of leading prose if we do decide to retain these.)
> 
> As you've all doubtless read in the minutes, you are all tasked with 
> discussing this and coming to some decision by 2007-09-07.
> 
> -James
> 
> [1] I chose Specification Group 42 at (near)random and really have no 
> interest in that one in particular, I've not bothered to look it up.
> 

-- 
Dr Arianna Ciula
Research Associate
Centre for Computing in the Humanities
King's College London
Strand
London WC2R 2LS (UK)
Tel: +44 (0)20 78481945
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/cch