[tei-council] update from the TEI Tite task force: comments on 2 tickets by October 1

Lou Burnard lou.burnard at retired.ox.ac.uk
Sun Sep 18 16:02:10 EDT 2011

On 18/09/11 20:53, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> On 18 Sep 2011, at 19:24, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
>> = What's next =
>> *I would like Council members to revisit these two tickets*:
>> c) adding<add>  and<del>:
>> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3136935&group_id=106328&atid=644065
> I am not sure what to say. If the Tite users want<add>  and<del>,
> sure, go and ahead and give it to them. I am not sure how we can
> help you decide this? If Tite plans to cover hand-written material,
> I personally think that's such a huge extra burden that
> the advantages of a standardized Tite are negligible. I think
> I'd prefer a TiteMS, which is Tite + Handwrititing, rather than
> giving<add>  and<del>  to the vast majority of Tite users. But
> that's Tite politics, not a technical question.

I agree with this analysis. Tite's use case, so far as I know, is not 
intended to cover non-print materials, so it's hard to see why you'd 
want <add> or <del> (OK there are a few cases where you see these things 
in printed texts -- there's one in the Guidelines even -- but they're 
really rare)

But it's up to the owners of the scheme to decide.

>> d) adding @facs to<pb/>:
>> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3136936&group_id=106328&atid=644065
> I have commented on this, hopefully saying how to to it

Suggested method looks perfectly plausible to me, iff you really want to 
enforce this restriction (cf my comments on the ticket back in February)

More information about the tei-council mailing list