[tei-council] sluice your glosses

[James Cummings]

On 28/02/13 01:24, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
> Since we go around telling people that you shouldn't read
> element names literally -- for example, that a <monogr> can
> include things that you don't think of as a "monograph" and
> that <msDesc> can be used to describe early printed books, not
> just handwritten manuscripts -- it seems to me that doing away
> with <gloss> in element specs, as Lou and Sebastian suggest,
> would be in line with what we say.

Yes, I'd agree with this. Retain the element (and continue to 
allow it at that point for those existing ODDs that use it) but 
remove it from all official TEI use as an example. Move any 
existing glosses that would be helpful (e.g. 'sic' but with more 
explanation) to a <remark> or <desc> with more explanation.

If no one objects strongly to this in the next couple days, can I 
have a volunteer to implement it?


> Lou said in his message "Otherwise we'll never finish" [if we
> don't do this], though I'm not sure what he means.

I think he means that we'd talk about it forever and not make a 
decision.

-James

-- 
Dr James Cummings, James.Cummings at it.ox.ac.uk
Academic IT Services, University of Oxford