[tei-council] http://purl.org/tei/fr/3519866 (@rend datatype)

[Sebastian Rahtz]

On 5 Jul 2012, at 17:00, Lou Burnard wrote:

>  Not to pre-empt further discussion, I observe that the 
> current datatype (1:n data.words) was a change deliberately (and quite 
> recently)

well, it was there at the start of P5, so not _that_recent. I can spot
the idea as far back as 2005.

> It does not really permit arbitrary syntax (like rendition ladders or 
> local CSS), so that (legacy) constituency remains unsatisfied. At the 
> same time, it requires the user to tell fibs, so that progressive (if 
> anal) thinkers are also dissatisfied with it. As I said on the ticket, 
> the only sensible way to resolve this issue is to return to the status 
> quo ante bellum.


which bellum? you want to go back to P4 and just allow anything?

I'm coming round to the idea of a mandatory indicator in the header which says how
@rend is to be interpreted (with a closed list of (eg) "token", "free" and "CSS"), 
since its unlikely we'll ever now close this awful Pandora's box. 
--
Sebastian Rahtz      
Head of Information and Support Group
Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431