[tei-council] addition of <availability>

[Mylonas, Elli]

The numbers confuse me - are we at the point now where Martin and Kevin are
in favor of
<availability> as direct child of <series> and <analytic> and grandchild of
<monogr> inside <imprint> ?

Kevin's switching seems backward, he seems to be asserting that he is
switching to what he initially supported,

Fabio is in favor of
<availability> should be permitted as a direct child of <biblStruct>
(presumably along with model.noteLike, idno, model.ptrLike,  relatedItem,
and citedRange after the ultimate <monogr> or <series>), but not as a
descendant of <series>, <monogr>, or <analytic>.

I am going along with Fabio,

  --elli

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Syd Bauman <
syd at paramedic.wwp.northeastern.edu> wrote:

> Kevin and Martin vote for #2.
>
> KH> **I believe I'm on the short list of people who can post to
> KH> tei-council even though I'm not a member of this list. Syd, if you
> KH> don't see a second copy of this, please forward to the list.**
> KH>
> KH> In my comment at
> KH> https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/484/#d072 , I actually
> KH> argued for:
> KH>
> KH> 7. <availability> should be permitted as a grandchild of <monogr>
> KH> inside <imprint>.
> KH>
> KH> But the recent discussion on tei-council now leads me to support
> KH> option (2).
> --
> 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
>