[tei-council] From <figure> to module dependencies

[Laurent Romary]

Le 19 nov. 09 à 10:00, Sebastian Rahtz a écrit :

>
> On 19 Nov 2009, at 08:26, Laurent Romary wrote:
>
>> The discussion and module and the "all in core" principle stated by
>> Sebastian shows that we will need rather soon than later a move
>> towards a better architecture for modules. If we had a means to  
>> elicit
>> module dependencies (<moduleRef> in <moduleSpec>?), this would allow
>> us to have nice, focused modules that could serve as libraries of
>> element to others.
>
> As I was remarking to Lou and Laurent separately recently, we must
> not lose sight of the fact that we increasingly enter the more complex
> world of both writing a specification and implementing it. It would  
> be easy
> (relatively) to add markup to ODD to express the problem, but the  
> bigger work
> is in the implementation of if in tools for user which make sense of  
> that markup.
>
> I can think of lots of ways foreword, but one might be for someone to
> write a free-standing "oddlint", which would do the same work as the  
> sanity
> checker in Roma, but more besides, including module dependency.

Agree. We need to carry out the two activities (spec + dev) in  
parallel. One difficulty is to find evolutionary steps which are both  
conceptually sound and implementable. We need to take our time on this  
before we actually publicise it widely, not only because the  
implementation must be there, but also to be sure that we understand  
the consequences of such a move as having, says, moduleRef in moduleSpec

Whatever happen with the ESF grant (for newcomers: we deposited a  
grant to pay for a prospective workshop on "the future of the TEI" to  
the European Science Foundaition), we should probably keep some time  
on this at the F2F meeting in March.