[tei-council] addition of <availability>

[Mylonas, Elli]

I think it definitely belongs in <biblPart>, but am willing to remove from
<analytic>, <serial> and definitely <monogr>

will do that during the day today. Is that kosher? --elli

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Syd Bauman <
syd at paramedic.wwp.northeastern.edu> wrote:

> Well, we *have* already discussed it at a face-to-face, but
> apparently we didn't do anywhere near a thorough enough job.
>
> We may be able to take care of this via e-mail, but nonetheless I'm
> in favor of leaving <availability> as a member of model.biblPart but
> backing out the addition of <availability> into the content models of
> <analytic>, <monogr>, and <serial> for this release.
>
>
> > Anything to do with <biblStruct> is always thorny. But I think one
> > thing we should probably not do is to introduce an element in a new
> > place only to remove it in a subsequent release after more debate.
> > So it might be prudent to remove any remotely controversial changes
> > from this release, and open up the ticket again for us to deal with
> > at the face-to-face.
> >
> > On the other hand, you might just want to allow it everywhere
> > anyone wants it, put that in the release and walk away with relief
> > from a fait accompli. :-)
> --
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
>
> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived
>