[tei-council] proof of concept of i18n work

[Kevin Hawkins]

On 11/17/2013 6:03 PM, Lou Burnard wrote:
> On 17/11/13 21:35, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>> On 17 Nov 2013, at 21:25, Lou Burnard<lou.burnard at retired.ox.ac.uk>  wrote:
>>
>>> I think it would be more sensible to trawl through the valDescs for any
>>> that are actually useful before doing any work on dating them.
>>>
>>> I strongly suspect the number is very small indeed -- most of them are a
>>> hangover from the days before we had datatyping
>> it may be more than you think, over 150. But I agree, many are redundant
>> nowadays.
>> --
>
> I will volunteer to go through killing all of them, if you like. I've
> had a look and so far I don't see any that are not either redundant
> (e.g. " the name of a module" for attDef/@module duh ) or contain vague
> mutterings that should be transferred to<remarks>  or zapped.

I hadn't understood the history here with datatyping and so am now more 
inclined toward this option than I was previously.  If we do get rid of 
them, we should add a note to tcw20 saying not to add <valDesc> in the 
future.  Do we also want to "no longer recommend" this element (per our 
policy in tcw27) in the tagdocs module?

K.