[tei-council] some attribute issues
James Cummings
James.Cummings at oucs.ox.ac.uk
Wed Oct 17 05:39:46 EDT 2007
Syd Bauman wrote:
>>> * I hope I don't sound like a broken record, but the version=
>>> attribute of <TEI> is still declared as data.decimal. (Besides not
>>> doing cool things like pointing to the ODD, which IIRC James wants
>>> and is what derailed the conversation last time, this doesn't even
>>> permit "1.0.1", or "5.0.1" or "P5 1.0".)
>> What should it be then?
For the record, I wanted to point to the ODD I used from encodingDesc
which, I suppose, I can do by doing something like ab/ptr/@target inside
it. encodingDesc seems more appropriate for that kind of information than
TEI/@version.
> Well, unless we can agree on a version numbering scheme in *very*
> short order (for which I don't have high hopes, as we have been
> unable to do so for years), I think it has to be
> <datatype maxOccurs="unbounded">
> <rng:ref name="data.word"/>
> </datatype>
> no?
>
> Personally, I'd much prefer we dictate what should be used as the
> version number. E.g. "P5" followed by ":" followed by either
> a) the Sourceforge release number, e.g. "0.4.1",
> b) the Sourceforge revision number, e.g. "r3682", or
> c) the date of the revision, e.g. "2007-05-23".
> Or some such system.
While I wouldn't complain about data.word, I would prefer something which
allowed a or b. I.e. those using SVN can put version="P5:r3682" those
using public announced releases can put version="P5:1.0.23". However,
wouldn't it be possible in generating the schemas to force the value of
this attribute to be the TEI version which the schemas were created against?
> Back to ST for a bit before bed.
I will be looking at this today sometime, promise.
-James
--
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
mailing list