[tei-council] tagdocs elements inside <graphic>

[Martin Holmes]

> So that leaves Drama, Speech, MS, and Dictionaries. I claim
> that none of these are meaningfully useful, documented,
> or follow any known recommendation.

I think the reason these are there is as an echo of the old Pizza Chef 
kind of model. For people coming to Roma for the first time, not 
understanding the module system or how to customize, I think they 
represent an unthreatening way to get started. But when they're bundled 
together with a bunch of absolutely inscrutable ones (TEI with XInclude, 
TEI with W3C ITS), then they're probably not helpful at all.

I'd really like to see a reborn Roma able to hand-hold novice users 
through this part of the process in a more helpful way, perhaps by 
asking them what kind of document they're going to mark up, and then 
suggesting some customizations to get started with, and explaining what 
actually happens when you choose one of these options. Meanwhile, the 
more offbeat stuff could be separated out and labelled as "advanced" or 
something like that.

Cheers,
Martin

On 12-09-05 01:05 AM, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> Sorry for being cryptic.
>
> At the moment, Roma offers you a choice of
>
>
> <option value="tei_bare.odd">TEI Absolutely Bare</option>
> <option value="teilite.odd">TEI Lite</option>
> <option value="tei_tite.odd">TEI Tite</option>
> <option value="tei_corpus.odd">TEI for Linguistic Corpora</option>
> <option value="tei_ms.odd">TEI for Manuscript Description</option>
> <option value="tei_drama.odd">TEI with Drama</option>
> <option value="tei_speech.odd">TEI for Speech Representation</option>
> <option value="tei_odds.odd">TEI for authoring ODD</option>
> <option value="tei_svg.odd">TEI with SVG</option>
> <option value="tei_math.odd">TEI with MathML</option>
> <option value="tei_xinclude.odd">TEI with XInclude (experimental)</option>
> <option value="tei_its.odd">TEI with W3C ITS</option>
> <option value="tei_dictionaries.odd">TEI for Dictionaries (experimental)</option>
>
>
> as customisations to build on.
>
> Bare, Lite, and Tite make sense; they are coherent and have a purpose.
> SVG, MathML, XInclude, ITS and ODD are also sensible,
> as they involve non-obvious techniques which you can't easily
> do in plain Roma.
>
> So that leaves Drama, Speech, MS, and Dictionaries. I claim
> that none of these are meaningfully useful, documented,
> or follow any known recommendation.
>
> Would anyone like to defend them?
> --
> Sebastian Rahtz
> Director (Research Support) of Academic IT Services
> University of Oxford IT Services
> 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
>

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