[tei-council] note in sourceDesc

[James Cummings]

On 12/03/14 16:54, Martin Holmes wrote:
>> It might be desirable to be able to limit the content of <p> in
>> the header (or text), but the you get into the question of
>> whether we really should be having two different elements.  I
>> still support the replacement of a highly limited <para> (or
>> whatever) in the header.
>
> I really don't like the idea of two separate elements. What I'd prefer
> is that Pure ODD enable us to define the content model of elements based
> on context; that this be convertible into models based on complexTypes
> in XSD; that it be convertible into Schematron in RelaxNG; and that DTDs
> leap into the dustbin of history.

I think I would prefer that as well. I can understand that it 
might be confusing for some people ("I can put element X in my 
paragraph here, but why not there?!"), but I think we could live 
with that. And you know I'd prefer if we didn't support DTDs any 
more.

> I know this is a bit distant, but I would like us to consider whether it
> should be one of the aims of moving to P6.

Do you feel this is a change that necessitates a move to P6? My 
reading of the Birnbaum Doctrine 
(http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/Council/Working/tcw09.xml) 
doesn't make that necessary.  (Though it is, of course, a 
significant break of backwards compatibility.)

-James


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