[tei-council] TEI Technical Council Budget 2012

[James Cummings]

If I summarise back the consensus I seem to hear is to do b) 
(ODD3 workshop) and c) (New Web Roma).

I think we can do both those things (depending on how much you 
think 'c' will cost). And potentially have some money left over 
for additional things. (Which we can decide on and budget for later.)

We'll invite MartinM and Brian (and anyone else people care to 
suggest) to participate in the Ann Arbor meeting (but remotely).

I'll work up a slightly more detailed budget but wait for the 
result of the DH panel to see if it is accepted before submitting 
it to the board.

-James


On 12/01/12 13:21, Martin Holmes wrote:
>
>> We need to agree on terminology  here. I think of "roma" as meaning
>> "user interface to ODD, with facilities to create and edit and odd, and
>> call ODD ->  XX processing". Note the "call" there. All the Roma-ish tools we
>> have now (Roma web, command-line, oxgarage, oxygen) all call the same
>> underlying XSLT library.   James' (d) is a rewrite of that backend library, but his
>> c) is a new Roma web (probably).
>>
>> personally, I go for c), on the grounds that Web Roma is _definitely_ incomplete
>> and has errors, and definitely  has real users, now.
>
> That's exactly how I feel. Web Roma is most people's interface to TEI,
> when they first start to create their own project (as opposed to working
> on someone else's, where the schema is already done). The slicker and
> more reliable it is, the better the initial experience, and the more
> positive people feel towards using TEI.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> On 12-01-12 01:12 AM, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>>
>> On 12 Jan 2012, at 00:18, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
>>> My recollection is that we did indeed solve most of the problems.  Even
>>> if there are outstanding issues about rationalization that Paul
>>> Schaffner (who will be attending as a Council member) can't answer for
>>> us, I imagine we could get Martin Mueller or Brian Pytlik Zillig on the
>>> phone or Skype to answer those questions.  They're both only one time
>>> zone away from Ann Arbor, so I can't imagine this will be difficult.
>>
>> I agree, it probably doesnt  need a full-scale session with MM and BPZ;
>> but we really should revisit the issue. There are certainly unsolved parts of the
>> equation -<signed>   is one of those. Asking MM/BPZ to test 2.0.1 on their
>> conversions now would be important.
>>
>>>> d) Another idea was to try to fund an entirely new processing
>>>> implementation of ODD2+ that is completely independent of the existing
>>>> XSLT. But this is problematic to budget.
>>>
>>> You mean fund a complete rewrite of Roma rather than a better Roma, as
>>> in ©?
>>
>> We need to agree on terminology  here. I think of "roma" as meaning
>> "user interface to ODD, with facilities to create and edit and odd, and
>> call ODD ->   XX processing". Note the "call" there. All the Roma-ish tools we
>> have now (Roma web, command-line, oxgarage, oxygen) all call the same
>> underlying XSLT library.   James' (d) is a rewrite of that backend library, but his
>> c) is a new Roma web (probably).
>>
>> personally, I go for c), on the grounds that Web Roma is _definitely_ incomplete
>> and has errors, and definitely  has real users, now.
>>
>> --
>> Stormageddon Rahtz
>> Head of Information and Support Group
>> Oxford University Computing Services
>> 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
>>
>> Sólo le pido a Dios
>> que el futuro no me sea indiferente
>>


-- 
Dr James Cummings, InfoDev,
Computing Services, University of Oxford