[tei-council] genetic draft -- big questions

[James Cummings]

On 23/08/11 15:46, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
> On 8/23/2011 10:27 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
>> Could I ask again for input from Council members on these questions,
>> particularly no 2?
>>> 1. Is this draft headed basically in the right direction? If not, what
>>> are the essential things that must change in it?
>>
>> 3 responses so far, all positive

+1

>>> 2. Should we announce the existence of this draft (AS A DRAFT) to TEI-L
>>> now, or do some more fiddling with it first?
>>
>> 2 responses, both negative
>
> I think that if there are things we have opinions on and the time and
> ability to resolve, we should do so before sharing more widely.

I think that we can resolve these things, and agree with the two 
negative votes in a "not just yet" mode. I think we should hammer 
our sourceDoc (or whatever) first, and update drafts to use that.

> If, on the other hand, we are unable to reach consensus on our own or
> need additional input, I suggest putting up the draft in CommentPress or
> digress.it, encouraging the community to comment on it in order for the
> appropriate person(s) to revise before sending it back to Council for
> consideration.

I think this would be good for many things, but Council has had 
this proposal and looked at it for two council meetings at least. 
We should go back to the community if we're unable to reach a 
consensus.

>>> 3. The draft still uses the name "<facsimile>" for the element which
>> possibly an emerging consensus in favour of<sourceDoc>   vel sim
>
> This sounds fine to me.

I think having facsimile and sourceDoc both are fine, and don't 
mind that name. Specifically
 > 1.  (teiHeader, facsimile?,  sourceDoc?,  text? )


And for the record I liked the idea of wrapping lines in some 
semantic-free container but wasn't sure it should be <ab> but 
don't have a better suggestion.

-james
-- 
Dr James Cummings, InfoDev,
Computing Services, University of Oxford