[tei-council] Xpointer (was Re: Budget and Cost Saving for next year)

Piotr Bański bansp at o2.pl
Tue Nov 29 03:27:30 EST 2011

Kill me not, bitte.

On 29/11/11 07:31, Laurent Romary wrote:
> The idea of a small working group on this is an excellent one. Could someone stand up to take the lead on this?
> Laurent
> Le 28 nov. 2011 à 18:41, Gabriel Bodard a écrit :
>> Can I ask, did Xpointer get any discussion in Paris? I don't see any 
>> reference to it in the minutes.
>> There wasn't much of a conclusion to the email thread, as far as I can 
>> see. Looks a bit like we were simultaneously coming to the conclusions 
>> that (a) we should drop TEI Xpointer, and (b) it might not be that 
>> hard/expensive to implement after all.
>> Assuming there hasn't been more discussion and decision-making that I've 
>> missed, should we set up a small working group (containing at least 
>> Piotr, Martin, Hugh Cayless, and whoever else we think might be 
>> interested and/or competent) to discuss and make some concrete proposals 
>> for how to go forward. I certainly see people who care about the aims of 
>> the xpointer scheme, whether or not they think this is the correct 
>> implementation of it.
>> G
>> On 2011-11-02 18:18, Piotr Bański wrote:
>>> Ah,
>>> I've had a closer look at the SF ticket too:
>>> "The following schemes are supported by this implementation:
>>> - XPointer element() Scheme
>>> - XPointer xmlns() Scheme
>>> - XPointer xmlns-local() Sc

More information about the tei-council mailing list