[tei-council] <styleDefDecl> and @scheme

[Gabriel Bodard]

Agreed re new attribute, and putting @scheme in a class.

I'm not sure I like the idea of "voting" as any kind of formal method of 
resolving tickets. The TEI Council works on more of a consensus model, 
not requiring unanimity by any means, but informally weighting people's 
objections so that if I say, "I'm a bit uncomfortable with that, but if 
everyone else goes for it I'll bow to the majority" a ticket can pass, 
but if Sebastian says, "No no no, that is abject insanity" a ticket will 
probably stay open until we've all discussed it some more.

What would voting gain us?

G

On 2013-03-15 12:15, James Cummings wrote:
>
> I'd vote in favour of the new attribute, and the class.
>
> Coincidentally, the new SF site does allow *voting* on tickets.
> I don't think we currently have this turned on (and I've no idea
> how it works or what constraints there are)...  Is this something
> we'd like to consider?
>
> -James
>
> On 14/03/13 22:05, Martin Holmes wrote:
>> On 13-03-14 02:35 PM, Syd Bauman wrote:
>>> What are the pros and cons you see of adding a new @schemVersion
>>> rather than adding "css2.1" and "css3" as values to the existing
>>> @scheme?
>>
>> There are two cons of adding e.g. "css2.1":
>>
>> 1. We'd have to keep adjusting the allowed value list every time a new
>> version of CSS begins the route to recommendation.
>>
>> 2. Other style languages may be added at some point, and they may have
>> their own versions, so it makes sense to separate the versions from the
>> family names.
>>
>> Cons for the new attribute are that it's a new attribute, and we have
>> hundreds of them already. :-)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Martin
>>
>>>>> <styleDefDecl scheme="css"> is perhaps not granular enough, in that
>>>>> it does not allow specification of the version of CSS in use. Would
>>>>> it be a good idea to add @schemeVersion so that users could specify
>>>>> e.g. CSS 2.1 or 3?
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>> While looking at this, I noticed that<styleDefDecl> and<rendition>
>>>>> both have @scheme attributes, locally defined, which have the same
>>>>> legal values. Shouldn't this be an attribute class? (I have a vague
>>>>> memory of a discussion about this before, but I can't find any
>>>>> trace of it; forgive me if this has already been dealt with.)
>>>>
>>>> I don't recall this, but it seems appropriate to me.
>>
>
>

-- 
Dr Gabriel BODARD
Researcher in Digital Epigraphy

Digital Humanities
King's College London
Boris Karloff Building
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL

T: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
E: gabriel.bodard at kcl.ac.uk

http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
http://www.currentepigraphy.org/