[tei-council] is TEI Lite defined by inclusion or exception?

[Lou Burnard]

My vote is with James, more or less, except that I think we might want 
to argue about what "currently" means.

My view is that TEI Lite is a historical artefact, dating from c. 
2006-2007, i.e. release 0.5 of P5. Any elements added to P5 after that 
date, if present, are there (probably) by accident.

(I suppose you could argue for making the baseline be release 1.0 though)



On 26/03/11 18:33, James Cummings wrote:
>
>
> My vote would be for it only to include what it currently includes. Things should only be consciously added to it rather than them getting it as a side effect.
>
> -James
>
>
> James Cummings, InfoDev, OUCS, University of Oxford (from phone)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sebastian Rahtz [sebastian.rahtz at oucs.ox.ac.uk]
> Received: Saturday, 26 Mar 2011, 14:29
> To: TEI Council [tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU]
> Subject: [tei-council] is TEI Lite defined by inclusion or exception?
>
> It's clear that TEI Tite  should be expressed in terms of what _is_ in it, not by what is _not_.
>
> How about Lite? when a new element is added to P5, should it appear in Lite?
>
> The hot money is on Lite being an _inclusion_ ODD, but seems worth seeing whether anyone
> feels strongly the other way.
> --
> Sebastian Rahtz
> Head of Information and Support Group, Oxford University Computing Services
> 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
>
> Sólo le pido a Dios
> que el futuro no me sea indiferente
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived