[tei-council] Galway agenda

[Syd Bauman]

Thanks for replying, Sebastian.


> and, as you rightly say, its not very well done at present. Seems
> like a good target for the next release to clean up some of the
> things you list

Nice to see we're in the same chapter, if not on the exact same page.


> although I don't really buy
> > Having custom on-line documentation (not necessarily printed) is,
> > IMHO, absolutely crucial to the acceptance of TEI in many circles.
> because I have never seen anyone say this in public.

Well, I have, although I have to admit, most often I'm hearing myself
:-) 

Seriously, I'm thinking of the groups who are really taken aback by
the size of TEI in the raw, and are excited at the possibility of
trimming TEI down to size for their own group. Some of them can be
quite dismayed that they can't document enumerated attribute values
in Roma, and even if they do, they don't get any readable doc.


> looking at
> http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-exemplars/html/teilite.doc.html,
> I am somewhat at a loss to see why you think this is so bad? apart
> from links back to the main guidelines.

Indeed, that version is not so bad (although it, too, could use some
work). But rather, generate the same documentation from Roma, and
you'll see what I mean. (Or try some other customization template.)


> I really don't agree about rewriting it as a desktop app. I don't
> recall anyone from userland ever asking for this. 

IIRC not too many in Kyoto actually cared whether the app was desktop
or web-based (some liked the idea of being able to do this w/o an
internet connection or having to run a local web service), but most
everyone liked some of the features that Amit was eager to put into a
desktop app, but wouldn't touch in an on-line app. One particular
feature I remember (because I am quite enamored of it) was the
ability to have both XML and GUI views of the ODD file. Kinda like
the way the CSSEdit program gives you a GUI but also lets you edit
CSS code directly.