[tei-council] Criteria for TEI Repository Inclusion

James Cummings James.Cummings at oucs.ox.ac.uk
Wed Mar 3 08:52:08 EST 2010

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> I don't think there is any one-answer-fits-all solution. People and their
> "software" vary hugely, both in themselves and over time. We
> do know roughly the boundaries, by using our exemplars of
>   * Tite  (close to our hearts)
>   * Epidoc (far away, own very capable community)
>   * TEIJ (in between)
> for the last, I think we start by cultivating it inhouse and then branching
> it off when it grows some legs (i _lurv_ mixed metaphor)

I think that seems quite reasonable as a vague policy myself. 
But if EpiDoc was just starting out, would we then include it and 
only kick it out when it got mature enough to stand on its own 
three feet?

What about something like the genetic editing material?  We have 
a directory called genetic/ where some of those working on 
genetic editing (as a sub-group of the TEI-MS SIG originally) 
have some work in progress which will eventually come before the 
council.  Now in this case it is probably there because various 
members of the council/board are involved in this completely 
worthwhile endeavour, and it just seemed like a convenient place 
to store it.  But why isn't there one fr work happening in 
scholarly journals, correspondence, or other SIG activities?  (It 
isn't that I object to the genetic being there, just that it 
seems potentially incongruous or confusing to others). If we are 
thinking about how/when we include/exclude stuff, where does 
general SIG working materials/testfiles/examples fall?


More information about the tei-council mailing list