[tei-council] Order, order (was re: layers again)

[Lou Burnard]

Yes, as James notes, adding the pointing features required for genetic 
actually might be useful for non-genetic usages of <change> as well. The 
other difference is that the element which groups <change>s 
(<revisionDesc> if we stick with the idea) would gain an @ordered 
attribute. As currently specified, this is just a yes/no choice as to 
whether the order of the child <change> elements is significant.  I 
wondered whether it might not be more useful to allow for more 
information, e.g. order="time:ascending" order="complexity:descending" 
order="none" order="alphabetical". Then I wondered whether it was a good 
idea to provide this attribute at all (for temporal ordering at least, 
<change>s can  be dated, so the presence of this attribute is an 
invitation to inconsistency/redundancy). Any views?

I spent most of my journey home from wburg working on the current draft, 
more specifically on checking the test files in the sourceforge 
genetic/examples directory. More on that anon.