TEI Council Conference Call 25 Jul 06

• Review of the minutes and action items
• Review of WG etc. progress
  • PB
  • PERS
• Towards 1.0 release priorities
• Other business
• Meetings

Review of the minutes and action items

JC: Update HOWTO to reflect the new structure and check that the discussion of SVN procedures introduced in it are all correct

JC reports this was done, but had not been announced to Council (until now)

JC: suggest new file names.

JC reports this item was done approximately 10 minutes ago.

Action 1: Council comment on the ‘short names’ version near the end of JC's post Possibilities for new file names. of earlier today.

Action 2: eds. implement JC's ‘short names’ suggestion unless objections are raised 2006-09-01

CT and DP: Come up with a proposed text of how to link texts and images

DP reports this item is still being worked on

Action 3: CT & DP Post proposal of how to link texts and images 2006-09-01

SB: See if an similar xpointer has been provided in W3C

SB reports that CT had completed this item before the end of the meeting in Kyoto [Note: The answer is ‘yes’, there is already an xpointer scheme for pointing at a particular part of an SVG-wrapped image (whether the image itself is JPG, PNG, SVG, or whatever). It is the svgView scheme using the viewBox parameter. E.g. http://www.picsRus.org/path/to/pic.svg#svgView(viewBox(10,10,640,480)). [CT—did I get that right??]]

Council must read chapt 14.9.1 p5.

This item was interpreted to mean that all Council members were supposed to have read P5 chapter 14.9.1; only a few did. The item was expanded slightly with a new due date.

Action 4: Council Read P5 chapter 14.9 Stand-off Markup and report that you've done so to the list. (Even if you have nothing particular to say.) 2006-08-12

CW: follow-up on previous request to MM for more prose describing the desired goals, the meaning of elements, the intended usage, etc.; also perhaps suggest a conference call for PB group.

CW reports MM has sent new material to him, which had been forwarded to the list and generated some discussion

JW and MZ: Look at both dictionaries drama modules, post to list

This item was interpreted to mean that these modules were to be looked at with respect to the class system. MZ reports this was done while Council was still in Kyoto.

DB: Look at TD (documentation elements, aka "tagdocs"), post to list.

DB reports will do this soon

Action 5: DB Report on TD (documentation elements) with respect to the class system, and post to the list. 2006-08-05

LB: motions that the Council identify within a week a list of specific items in the current proposals that need to be addressed.

LB reports this was action has been disposed of [?...?]

SB: fix <listRef> from ptr* to ptr+

SB reports this was completed

SB: merge <date> and <dateStruct> . Same with <timeStruct> ?

SB reports that this was done, but there are still questions pending which had been posted and generated some discussion.

Action 6: SB Repost a summary of the questions pending, if possible with a definitive suggestion which will be implemented if no one objects

LB: Solution: macro.xtext doesn't cut it. Needs to be reviewed. What, if anything, should replace it?

This item arose from our discussion in Kyoto of the sub-components of <dateStruct> and <timeStruct> (in particular, <day> , <geog> , <hour> , <minute> , <month> , <second> , <week> , and <year> ), each of which currently has content macro.xtext. It was pointed out in Kyoto that this content model is far too limited — it is impossible to encode that some letters are supplied in the name of the month, e.g. One suggestion was to replace macro.xtext with macro.phraseSeq. In Kyoto it was agreed that macro.xtext provided insufficient flexibility, but there was some concern that macro.phraseSeq permitted too much. LB agreed to review the situation and report back to Council with a recommendation. LB reports that he has since changed his mind, and now believes that macro.xtext is sufficient. Furthermore, it seems that many on the call believe that these elements (except perhaps for <geog> ) serve no useful purpose. It was suggested that we investigate the removal of these and perhaps other elements. (See below.)

SB: Change <region> , <country> to macro.phraseSeq instead of marcro.paraContent

SB reports this has been completed

LB: Add model.phrase to TCW07

LB reports that this was done, and that he posted some questions on 10 Jun

Editors: Improve wording. Where does the personography stuff go?

LB reports this item is partially done — personography has been inserted into into ND (names & dates), but it may need to be moved elsewhere, and further work on the chapter is needed.

Editors: Fix manuscript desc modules dependencies on names and dates in current architecture

LB reports this has not been done, but that he has a plan for accomplishing it

Editors: see if there are other interdependencies

LB reports this has not been completed, but there has been discussion on list in this area

SR: see if there is a way to implement moral dependencies.

LB reports that some discussion has occured on this topic. After some discussion on the issue, the general consensus is that we do not need module dependency

SB: find out places were an element is place like and datalike

SB explained that this item refers to part of the ‘header-phrase’ class project. While there has been much discussion about what a reduced phrase-level model class would look like, we have not yet ascertained where such a class could be used. SB reports that, per his previous post on agenda items, this has not yet been done.

Action 7: SB find places where a ‘header-phrase’ class would be useful. 2006-08-08

Editors: Make a new class model.setting part contain model.pLike ... -rs

LB reports this was done on 12 Jun

Editors: make a new class whose only member is <desc> that would replace some of the occurrences of macro.glossSeq

SB explained that this action item arose in Kyoto when it was pointed out that there are many content models that use the macro macro.glossSeq or the class model.glossLike where many of the permitted elements do not make sense, probably only <desc> is desirable. LR was a main proponent of this position.

Action 8: LR Explain where macro.glossSeq or model.glossLike is not a good idea, but <desc> is.

DP: contact the overlap group and give them a report and get feedback on span

DP reports she had been waiting for SB to update NH (the multiple hierarchies chapter)

Action 9: DP post to TEI-OL-SIG about span alone, deferring information about the chapter 2006-07-25

JW: discuss <biblItem> , <biblStruct> , and MODS

This has not yet been accomplished.

Action 10: CW Remind JW about posting <biblItem> , <biblStruct> , and MODS discussion. ASAP

DB: draft document of guiding principles for further dev of p5

DB reports he has solicited input from Council, and has started work on a document, which is not quite complete

Action 11: DB post draft of ‘guiding principles for further development’ document 2006-08-01

LB: report on Terminology Chapter

No one can recall what was supposed to be reported on for this item, so LB is unsure whether it has been accomplished or not. What LB knows about the status of this chapter and the editors' opinions can be found in TC W 08

LB: Replace the current TEI core module with smaller cores

It was generally thought this was not an action item intended for near-future implementation. Some thought it was not truly intended as an action item at all, others that it was intended as a post-1.0 item. In either case, it was not supposed to have been done, and has not been.

Review of WG etc. progress

PB

MD thinks that Peter Kidd, Richard Gartner, & LB's document of 1997 may describe a more sensible approach.

Action 12: Council read PB document, post to list even if only "I read it, it's fine" 2006-08-01

MD & DP think that the PB draft MM posted covers a lot of ground, and that perhaps something more general would be better.

Action 13: MD Rewrite the examples MM provides in the PB document using a more generic mechanism none

MD also suggests looking at Prague's MASTER+.

Action 14: DP review her own manuscript description work to see if anything there would be helpful, and report back to list 2006-09-20

Action 15: MD & DP Look at MASTER+ to see if anything there would be helpful, and report back to list 2006-09-20

Action 16: LB ask PB group if MD & DP could be added to group

PERS

MD reports that the personography activity has USD 2500 in funds allocated but not spent. The group could spend some of this money working on places, place names, pointing to canonical form of a name (i.e., regularization).

Action 17: MZ Check whether the monies personography has not spent was pre-budgeted, and whether Council reimbursements have been processed yet

Towards 1.0 release priorities

On the issue of a re-write of TC (Critical Apparatus), Council decided we could postpone the re-write until after 1.0 if needed, with the idea that if a new mechanism for text-critical markup is introduced, the old one would still kept for compatibility, and thus would not break any existing P5 documents.

Council discussed the issue of backward compatibility and what it means for future releases of the Guidelines. No particular decisions were reached, but some of the ideas discussed will likely be incorporated into the document DB is working on.

After some discussion, the following general deadlines were suggested.

Action 18: SB post to TEI-L, announcing that the deadline for a feature request to be considered for P5 1.0 is 2006-09-01 2006-07-28

Action 19: Council come up with a list of elements to be considered for execution, and submit as a feature request on Sourceforge 2006-09-01

Action 20: eds. class system review and touch-up 2006-09-01

Action 21: MZ Submit first draft of re-writes of chapters CF (conformance) and MD (modifying) to editors 2006-09-18

Action 22: eds. survey or ‘triage’ of feature requests 2006-09-21

It was noted that chapter review is an on going action, and won't be finished until everything is finished

Other business

No other major items were brought up for Council's consideration.

Meetings

Next telephone conference call is scheduled for Wed 27 Sep 06 at 12:00.

Appendix A:

Wrapped up at 13:28.

    |  HTML View | XML View | Printable Version |  |  |  | Contact/Feedback