[tei-council] another High Noon proposal

[Kevin Hawkins]

On 1/11/2013 11:50 AM, Gabriel Bodard wrote:
> On 2013-01-11 16:45, Syd Bauman wrote:
>> * Why is this urgent? I realize we had planned for a release of the
>>     Guidelines soon (14th? 17th?), but why is that carved in stone? I'd
>>     much prefer to get this right and push the release a week later.
>
> I think if this is going to involve any kind of a major change to the
> current way of doing things, we want not to push next week's release
> back by a week (which might be a problem for Hugh who has cleared a day,
> for example), but to put off these changes until after this release, so
> that we can have several months to spot problems in the Jinks versions
> before we release again. (In other words, even a week isn't enough. This
> is supposed to be a maintenance release, not a major new re-architecture.)

I agree that we've got a lot of last-minute things and are risking 
having to put out a second release a week or two later once we further 
fix things.

I've been wondering whether we were still planning to call this a 
"maintenance release".  My impression is that we have actually 
implemented more new features since the last release than we did between 
the last two releases.  That is, this is not really a maintenance 
release any more.

>> * Elli Mylonas mentioned the possibility of leaving the tagdoc page
>>     looking pretty much as it does, but if element<foo>  has deleted
>>     attribute @bar from class att.duck, then the "@bar" would be
>>     crossed out in the parenthetical list of attributes that follow
>>     "att.duck". (Just an idea.)
>
> I like that idea, yes. It *might* be a little bit confusing for people
> who don't know or care about attribute classes, but it would be pretty
> transparent. (Especially if a tool-tip were to add "Does not inherit the
> attribute @bar from att.duck" or similar.)

I agree!