[tei-council] a proposal for a change to ODD (copy of ticket I just put in SF)
James.Cummings at oucs.ox.ac.uk
Mon Mar 8 19:08:05 EST 2010
Lou Burnard wrote:
>> I think, from memory, that we disagreed with the practicality of
>> it for real-world work on the whole Guidelines. The theory is fine.
That was one of the objections. You two also argued that
decontextualised examples don't always make sense (which really missed
the point, that they wouldn't necessarily be decontextualised, just
decoupled from the guidelines/specs so that their re-use was facillitated).
> Precisely. The present conversation is about a customisation of the TEI,
> not the whole of the Guidelines.
Is not the TEI Guidelines in theory one big ODD file? If it makes sense
for one, why not for the other?
> Then there's also the question of foreign language examples (cf recent
> email from our man in Nancy)
I only think this *strengthens* the case for a repository of examples
which are then referenced from the Guidelines/Specs. Just as the
English Guidelines use examples from many languages, so might
translations of the Guidelines. Moreover, they want them to stay up to
date when the examples are changed because of changes in the TEI.
>> doable, similar to what I just suggested. It's a big stick, though.
> a big stick to squash a fairly small insect, I'd say
I'd be tempted to say that an ODD should maybe check simply that all the
elements in an example are present for the current schema, and if not
add a comment to the example indicating it might be out of date because
element <foo> is no longer included in the schema. That seems like it
would be much more straightforward to program, doesn't remove the
example, but warns the user that it may be inaccurate.
More information about the tei-council