[tei-council] Feature Request Review Outcomes online

[Lou Burnard]

Dan O'Donnell wrote:
> Some notes:
>
>       * Is the issue with cit and said in this one something that was
>         not considered but that needs to be looked at?
>                 permit model.quoteLike within <sp> Council
>                 agrees that this is a useful addition, but feels that
>                 <q> should be available as well as <quote> and therefore
>                 recommends adding model.qLike instead. (This also makes
>                 <cit> and <said> available, which seems a little odd.)
>                 [closed]
>   

It wasn't considered at the meeting, and I don't think it's a serious 
enough concern to warrant reopening the ticket, but I did think Council 
might want to consider some of the implications: in particular in future 
we might want to review the way the two classes (qLike and quoteLike) 
are defined,


>       * This one could be said to have different actions: on me and
>         Sebastian to come up with use cases and sheets, and on PB to
>         integrate any suggestions worthwhile into the guide he's been
>         planning.
>                 Provide additional documentation on formatting a TEI
>                 document Council reviewed this document, but did not
>                 feel that its contents were appropriate as a chapter of
>                 the Guidelines. It was felt that many of the topics
>                 adressed would be usefully provided as a standalone
>                 tutorial guide of some sort, however. Action ?
>   

Thanks, have revised accordingly. The ticket remains open however.

>       * Also in the following, the use of @lemma was to be deprecated,
>         no?
>                 resolve @lemma datatype problem Council noted that the
>                 use of the @lemma attribute to hold textual data was
>                 inconsistent, but also recognised that this was a very
>                 common usage. The simplest solution appeared to be to
>                 change the datatype so as to permit spaces. Council also
>                 proposed adding a new @lemmaRef attribute to point to a
>                 definition of the lemma held elsewhere. This would
>                 provide a pair analogous to the @key @ref attributes on
>                 name etc. The child element solution would also require
>                 definition of some other child element to hold the
>                 non-lemmatised form. Changing @maxOccurs would introduce
>                 ambiguity. Some more prose is needed to introduce the
>                 new attribute within #AISP. [pending]
>
>   
No, I don't recall a firm decision to deprecate the way @lemma is 
currently used -- deprecation means we are more or less committed to 
removing it at a future release.  It was proposed, but I pointed out 
that several gazillion applications would immediately have to reinvent 
it, which seemed pointless, since for 99% of current use cases it posed 
no problems. The inconsistency should be noted however, and that should 
go into the revision of AISP.