[tei-council] Ticket #2976715 -- abandon it?

Laurent Romary laurent.romary at inria.fr
Wed Apr 27 12:45:28 EDT 2011

+1 There is enough food for another round of biblDisc at our next f2f, under the motto "deprecate the third one"...

Le 27 avr. 2011 à 18:43, Kevin Hawkins a écrit :

> Fine by me.
> On 4/26/2011 8:09 PM, Martin Holmes wrote:
>> I took on ticket #2976715 last week, and followed the council's
>> recommendation (adding<distributor>  to model.respLike), only to have
>> numerous tests fail because<distributor>  then ends up in the content
>> model of various elements through two distinct routes.
>> I've since spent a lot of time trying to figure out a simple way to
>> implement the desired change, and I don't see any easy way to do it. I
>> also notice that the actual change we agreed to (add<distributor>  to
>> model.respLike) was actually only a preliminary step in a proposed
>> method of making the following elements:
>> <principal>
>> <funder>
>> <sponsor>
>> available in<analytic>,<monogr>  and<series>. However, the second step
>> in the proposal on the ticket, that "model.respLike be added to
>> <analytic>,<monogr>  and<series>, so that these elements are available
>> in<biblStruct>  citations", was not agreed to by council in any case.
>> So I think we're in a bit of a mess, all in all. I think the following
>> things:
>> 1.<distributor>  does belong in model.respLike, along with<principal>
>> et al., but there's no way to get it there without making significant
>> structural changes. (Meanwhile, Kevin believes that neither
>> <distributor>  nor<funder>  should be in model.respLike anyway.)
>> 2. model.respLike does belong in<analytic>  et al., but council doesn't
>> think so, and in any case this would be hard to achieve.
>> 3. The content model of<biblStruct>  and its children is a big mess,
>> largely due to historical factors and subsequent tinkering, and the only
>> way to deal with it will be to start from scratch, with a more logical
>> set of model classes. This would inevitably break the Birnbaum doctrine.
>> So I propose closing this ticket without action, since I opened it in
>> the first place, and only Kevin, Lou and I seem to care about it.
>> All in favour say aye!
>> Cheers,
>> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Laurent Romary
laurent.romary at inria.fr

More information about the tei-council mailing list