[tei-council] pure ODD incursion?

[Syd Bauman]

Ummm .. what's the status of PureODD? I ask because I am a bit taken
aback to find pieces of it in the current released version of the
Guidelines. I had expected PureODD would be developed as an ODD
customization of the current Guidelines and discussed by Council as a
package (as it were) before inclusion, like any other such
significant change.

But I find that some snippets of PureODD (e.g., content/@allowText
and <alternate>) are already in release 2.6.0 on the web, and others
(e.g. model.contentPart) are in the development version in
Sourceforge. 

I don't think this stuff is ready for prime time. While Council
enthusiastically gave the go-ahead for work on PureODD, I don't think
we expected development to happen *in the publicly released version*.
Moreover, I had personally expected to be included in conversations
and development thereof. (Perhaps I had been and missed some
communications -- I have been a bit more out-of-the-loop than usual
due to daughter's illness.)

As evidence that this is not ready for prime time, the <datatype> of
the <attDef> for sequence/@preserveOrder has text content as opposed
to an <rng:ref>. (Yes, in the pure future something other than
<rng:ref> will go there, but I not plain text.)

BTW, that makes said <datatype>, and thus P5, invalid. Why doesn't my
build process or Mr. Jenkins catch it?