[tei-council] next release

[Syd Bauman]

> My view was that we should go for maximum reassurance. If we say
> the schemas have changed after 2 months, _I_ think it makes us look
> bad. YMMV, naturally.

My mileage does vary -- I don't think it makes us look bad to fix a
problem after 2 months, I think it makes us look bad to let a known
problem languish for an extra 3 or 6 months, or whatever.


> More importantly, I personally would prefer to keep work to a
> minimum; text changes are scary enough without schema changes too.

I'm only mildly sympathetic, here. That is, I wouldn't want to
exclude changes that affect schemas just because they effect schemas.
I wouldn't mind excluding one because it's too much work to do right
in the time frame we're allotting.


> If we're doing a proper book, I want unchangeable text quite a long
> time before, to get page- and line-breaking right.

Good point, in which case promising the book and an update on the
same day seems like bad planning. If updates are for 01-01, book
should be 01-20 or so.


> If we say now we are doing text errata, and give a 4 week window of
> submission, we'll get some stuff, I have no doubt. If we say we're
> open for bug fixes, people like the MSers will dive in with all the
> little things they forgot to mention last year.....

This is a really good argument. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the
concept that we are "open" or "closed" for bug (whether typo or
schema) reports or feature requests, but I see the point of saying
"send your typos in NOW for fixing in 01-01 release", and not
mentioning bigger things.