[tei-council] Conformance inconsistency

Daniel O'Donnell daniel.odonnell at uleth.ca
Fri Oct 26 00:48:13 EDT 2007


This is a very important last minute query imo. Conal's view is what I
meant--I'm the source of the algorithmically convertable--I think.

Can we clarify this before the end of the weekend?

-dan

On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 14:24 +1300, Conal Tuohy wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 19:53 -0400, Syd Bauman wrote:
> > Thanks for the fast, interesting reply Conal. 
> > 
> > But you're implying that in order to be algorithmically conformable,
> > my added stuff has to be "globally unique", 
> 
> Exactly, that's exactly the point which I think is implicit in the
> definition of 23.3.
> 
> > which is clearly
> > something I cannot completely control for, even if I do make up a
> > namespace. (I cannot *prevent* other people from using my namespace!)
> 
> Of course neither you nor the guidelines can always compel people to use
> namespaces correctly.  The best we can do is offer people a strategy for
> using namespaces which will work for everyone who follows it. If we all
> follow the simple rule of using their own namespaces for customisations,
> then our customisations will always be distinguishable from each other,
> and fully-automatic conversion will always be possible. 
> 
> > Besides, that is way too high a hurdle. 
> 
> Have we not already agreed that this is the recommended approach?
> 
> See the example of adding a "topic" attribute:
> http://tei.oucs.ox.ac.uk/P5/Guidelines-web/en/html/USE.html#MDNS
> 
> > Why, when I send you a
> > document, am I responsible to make sure you can transform both it and
> > James's document with the same stylesheet? 
> 
> If not you, then who else should be responsible? :-)
> 
> > Surely it is enough on my
> > end if you can transform my document with some stylesheet, whether or
> > not the same one would work on James's documents?
> 
> That's not really "automatic" though is it? The existing definition says
> the translation must be "automatic", but according to you I should first
> have to look at the document, read the ODD, and then pick which
> conversion process to apply. If the process of converting a
> "Conformable" document to a "Conformant" document were truly automatic,
> then  it would be possible to maintain an archive of "Conformable" TEI
> files along with a single script which could convert any one of them to
> Conformant TEI.
> 
> The process can't be fully automatic if it relies on the ODD, because
> there's still no standard mechanism to link an instance to its ODD (is
> there?)
> 
> > > e.g.
> > >    A document is also said to be TEI Conformant if it is a
> > >    well-formed XML document whose non-TEI features can be
> > >    unambiguously recognised, and the document transformed
> > >    algorithmically and automatically into a TEI Conformant document
> > >    as defined above without loss of information.
> > 
> > But again, if the non-TEI feature is rendMe=, it can be unambiguously
> > recognized as non-TEI (within my document instances), whether it is
> > in my namespace or not.
> 
> It can be recognised as non-TEI, but it can't be distinguished from some
> other rendMe.
> 
> > > Whereas if the new attribute were not in a namespace, then after
> > > interchange it might not be clear what the attribute used to mean
> > > (because of its name not being globally unique). 
> > 
> > Again, its name is unique within any documents *I* sent you. Its
> > meaning should be clear because it's documented in my ODD (which I
> > should have also sent you).
> > Note that even if I add a subtype= to <title>, even though it is a
> > name used by TEI, because it is not used by TEI on <title> it is
> > still unambiguously recognizable as non-TEI and potentially
> > algorithmically transformable to a TEI-Conformant document. (E.g., by
> > appending the value of what used to be subtype= to the value of type=
> > or some such.) This holds true whether or not I stick it into my own
> > namespace.
> 
> I have already noted my objection to this: it's not sufficient for "automatic, algorithmic conversion".
> 
> > > An algorithm coud not, as a practical matter, distinguish the
> > > attribute rendMe which you had added from a rendMe attribute which
> > > I had added, intending it to mean something else altogether.
> > 
> > No, but the same algorithm is not going to be used on both your
> > documents and mine. E.g., even if we use our own separate namespaces,
> 
> If same algorithm can be used (an algorithm that recognises the 2
> distinct forms of markup, and handles them distinctly), then the
> conversion can be automatic. If no algorithm can distinguish the 2
> distinct forms of markup, then the conversion cannot be considered
> automatic. According to the definition in 23.3, "algorithmic
> conformance" requires automation, and automation (as I believe I've
> demonstrated) requires global uniqueness of names.
> 
> > I may have created value lists for type= and subtype= of <title> that
> > make it possible to transform by appending; you may have created
> > values that would cause a loss if information if merely appended (but
> > might be OK if appended with a "_" separator).
> > 
> > In case that possibility isn't clear:
> > 
> >             Syd             Conal
> >             ---             -----
> > type=       a, b, c, a_d    a, aa, aaa
> > subtype=    d, e, f         a, ab, aab
> > 
> > The algorithm "append subtype to type" works for Syd (whether
> > subtype= is in my namespace or not) but not Conal; the algorithm
> > "append a '_' and then subtype" works for Conal (whether subtype= is
> > in his namespace or not) but not Syd.
> 
> Yes here you've presented 2 markup schemes and 2 conversion algorithms,
> but how do you decide which algorithm to apply? Because the 2 schemes
> don't use globally unique names, you can't automatically pick the
> appropriate algorithm. If they had used namespaced names, then the
> choice of algorithm could be automated; that is to say, the 2 algorithms
> could be combined into a single algorithm capable of handling both
> cases.
> 
-- 
Daniel Paul O'Donnell, PhD
Department Chair and Associate Professor of English
Director, Digital Medievalist Project http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/
Chair, Text Encoding Initiative http://www.tei-c.org/

Department of English
University of Lethbridge
Lethbridge AB T1K 3M4
Vox +1 403 329-2377
Fax +1 403 382-7191
Email: daniel.odonnell at uleth.ca
WWW: http://people.uleth.ca/~daniel.odonnell/



More information about the tei-council mailing list