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

[Kevin Hawkins]

On 9/19/2011 1:36 PM, James Cummings wrote:
> On 19/09/11 17:25, Lou Burnard wrote:
>> Hear hear. Not least because of its lack of a TEI Header -- which makes
>> it arguably non-TEI-conformant anyway.
>
> Is there any argument about that? If it breaks the TEI Abstract
> Model, it is not TEI-conformant.  The argument might be whether
> it was 'Conformable' or not, but I don't think it can be since it
> includes no metadata and the TEI Abstract Model requires metadata.

Tite never directly claims to be TEI-conformant (according to the 
definition of conformance in P5), but the introduction to Tite contain 
this sentence:

"Tite-encoded documents are TEI documents, and TEI Tite, with the 
exception of convenience elements (b, i, ul, sup, sub, smcap, cols  and 
ornament, all of which can be converted back to canonical TEI), is a 
pure subset of the TEI." (a)

The Tite spec later says:

"Tite omits the <teiHeader> element as a convenience to transcribers. 
This departs from normal TEI practice, which requires <TEI>  as the root 
element, containing <teiHeader> and text  elements. In order to bring a 
document encoded in TEI Tite into adherence with the TEI abstract model, 
projects should add a teiHeader before engaging in post-transcription 
processing." (b)

I thought about revising (a) but decided it wasn't necessary in light of 
(b).

But since this is a continuing point of contention within Council, I 
think I'd better.  Once Lou replies on a point of clarification on his 
last suggested edits, I'll revise (a) to the following:

"Tite uses a subset of TEI elements, except for a few renamed for 
convenience of use by vendors.  However, Tite is not a TEI-conformant 
customization since it breaks the TEI Abstract Model by omitting teiHeader."

--Kevin