[tei-council] pure ODD incursion?

[Sebastian Rahtz]

> On 11 Sep 2014, at 02:15, "Syd Bauman" <syd at paramedic.wwp.northeastern.edu> wrote:
> 
> 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.

That's exactly what happened, surely? I am a bit puzzled, I thought this was all accepted some time ago. There haven't been conversations in private about this. Some long debates on this list....

> 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 anything new is being added this release. Model.contentpart us there now

> 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>.  

A bad error, I agree, at first sight.

Sebastian