[tei-council] review of IM

Syd Bauman Syd_Bauman at Brown.edu
Sun Oct 28 07:01:26 EST 2007


> Great that this stuff has finally had a proofread,
> I shall sleep easier at night.

Indeed. It's a pity no one else has looked at it, and I'm sorry it
took so long for me to.


> > [delete or move to appendix]
> We could discuss at length; but let's not. I'd leave sleeping dogs
> alone.

I was hoping it would not require any lengthy discussion, but rather
everyone would say "duh! yeah, this should be an appendix" or "hey!
this doesn't belong in the Guidelines". But if it requires even a
medium-length discussion, I'm with you -- defer to 1.1.


> > The entire section does not mention the inclusion of Schematron
> > rules in an ODD, nor their extraction.

> true. a complete omission. but unless you can write a section in
> the next few hours, not much to be done.

I can certainly give it a try. Given that the extraction process is
so simple, it shouldn't be that hard to write. (Famous last words,
eh? :-)
Does anyone think we should *not* include this?


> With regard to your detailed comments,
> I'll comment below only if I disagree

Good! I like that kind of efficiency.


> >     <item><gi>moduleRef</gi> elements with <att>url</att> attributes refer to
> >       external schemas written in RELAX
> >       NG<?tei do these have to be in XML or compact syntax? --sb?>. 
> XML

OK. then it should read

    <item><gi>moduleRef</gi> elements with <att>url</att> attributes
      refer to external schemas written in RELAX NG (XML syntax).
      These should remain untouched, and be passed directly to the
      output schema when it is created.</item>


> > * #IM-unified/p[7]/note, sentence 2: would "The roma program behind
> >   the P5 Roma application is not as sophisticated, ..." be incorrect?
> >   
> yes. there is no "roma program". you could could say
> 
> "The XSLT transformations behind the P5 Roma application are
> not as sophisticated".

I'm happy to see this rewording in the section, but I'm a bit
confused about the above statement: if there is no roma program, what
is at [Sourceforge-tei]/trunk/Roma/roma.sh? (Which program I run
to build P5 quite frequently.)


> [comments on #IM-unified/p[7], last sentence]
> because an empty <zeroOrMore> is an error.

Check. So the sentence should read something like one of the following:

    Consequently, surrounding constructs (such as
    <gi>rng:zeroOrMore</gi>) may also have to be removed, lest the
    deletion of the reference causes them to be invalid.
or
    After the reference has been deleted, its parent element in the
    output schema (for example, <gi>rng:zeroOrMore</gi>) should be
    checked to ensure that it is still valid, and if not, it should
    be deleted, too.
or
    If deletion of the reference means that its surrounding construct
    (such as <gi>rng:zeroOrMore</gi>) has no content left, the
    surrounding construct itself may also need to be deleted.
or
    Surrounding constructs, such as a <gi>rng:zeroOrMore</gi>, may also
    have to be removed as a consequence, as they themselves may be
    invalid without the deleted reference.


> >   I think that all references to programs, utilities, commands,
> >   etc. should be encoded as <name type='pgm'>. (After all,
> >   "trang" is the name of a program.)
> interesting. had not occurred to me to use <name> for that

I also think we should be using <name> for classes, macros,
datatypes, etc.


> > * IMGS/p[8], rest of para: Why are we recommending this only for
> >   DTDs? Just because it is hard for us to do for RELAX NG doesn't
> >   mean we should not recommend ODD processors do this.
> true.

OK, so here's a crack at a complete re-write:

      <p>Finally, ODD processors may wish to build in support for
      some of the methods for associating a document instance with a
      schema. The TEI does not mandate any particular method, but
      does suggest that those which are already part of XML (the
      DOCTYPE declaration for DTDs) and W3C Schema (the
      <att>xsi:schemaLocation</att> attribute) be supported where
      possible.</p>

      <p>In order for the <att>xsi:schemaLocation</att> attribute to
      be valid when a document is validated against either a DTD or a
      RELAX NG schema, ODD processors may wish to add a declaration
      for this attribute to the root element, even though it is not
      part of the TEI <foreign>per se</foreign>. For DTDs this means
      adding
      <eg>xsi:schemaLocation CDATA #IMPLIED
 xmlns:xsi CDATA #FIXED 'http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance'</eg>
      to the list of attributes on the root element, which permits
      the non-namespace-aware DTD language to recognize the
      <code>xsi:schemaLocation</code> notation. For RELAX NG, the
      namespace and attribute would be declared in the usual way:
      <eg>namespace xsi = "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"</eg> and
      <eg>attribute xsi:schemaLocation { list { data.namespace, data.pointer }+ }</eg>
      inside the root element declaration.</p>

      <p>Note that declaration of the <att>xsi:schemaLocation</att>
      attribute in a W3C Schema schema is not permitted. Therefore,
      if W3C Schemas are being generated by converting the RELAX NG
      schema (for example, with <name type="pgm">trang</name>), it
      may be necessary to perform that conversion prior to adding the
      <att>xsi:schemaLocation</att> declaration to the RELAX NG.</p>

      <p>It is recognised that this is an unsatisfactory solution,
      but it permits users to take advantage of the W3C Schema
      facility for indicating a schema, while still permitting
      documents to be validated using DTD and RELAX NG processors
      without any conflict.</p>


> > * #ref-faith: probably would be good to come up with a more recent
> >   image. 
> >   
> done

Looks much better, thanks. I may create an image from my Mac soon,
which looks even better. (Nicer typeface, better distinction between
bold and roman, etc.)



More information about the tei-council mailing list