[tei-council] version 2.0.1 p5subset.xml states "edition 2.0.0"

[Martin Holmes]

> In that case, could I slip geo -> att.declaring into this one? Or would
> that be rude for a sub-decimal release?

I think that would be uncontroversial. The only arguments are over 
whether <location> deserves it too (Syd, and now I, say yes, Lou says 
no), but the argument for <geo> is convincing.

I would like to aim for a release next week, in which all the trivial 
typos that have been reported have been fixed (I've been trying to do 
those as they come in), and other simple issues like this are done. Then 
we'd be able to review the remaining tickets and raise new issues in 
preparation for the April meeting.

Cheers,
Martin

On 12-01-12 09:45 AM, Gabriel Bodard wrote:

> G
>
> On 2012-01-12 17:39, Martin Holmes wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I think we need to release a 2.0.2 soon, during which we again run
>> through the instructions, after adding the tagging instruction. Should
>> we do a quick trawl through the tickets and decide which ones might be
>> polished off quickly without controversy?
>>
>> Can I be the one to go through the release steps this time?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Martin
>>
>> On 12-01-12 08:27 AM, Peter Stadler wrote:
>>> Dear geeks again,
>>>
>>> again wondering: just downloaded the current release 2.0.1 from sourceforge (tei-2.0.1.zip) and the editionStmt at tei-2.0.1/xml/tei/p5subset.xml reads<edition>2.0.0 Last updated on<date when="2011-12-16">16th December 2011</date>.</edition>
>>>
>>> Does that mean it wasn't updated at all or is just the editionStmt wrong?
>>>
>>> Many thanks again
>>> Peter
>>>
>>
>

-- 
Martin Holmes
University of Victoria Humanities Computing and Media Centre
(mholmes at uvic.ca)