TEI Stand-Off Markup WG 2003-06-20 Conference Call Notes

Initials Used for People

SB Syd Bauman
LB Lou Burnard
CC Chris Catton
DD David G. Durand
JH Jessica Hekman
FV Fabio Vitali

All times are UTC (+00:00, Zulu, GMT, whatever).

Commenced ~13:21 with DD, SB, JH, FV, CC.

SO W 04

‘Above’ et al. Yup, we agree that they are semantically different. No one seemed ready to commit to agreeing that CC's suggestion of <label> was the right solution, or not; however, no one had any better alternatives. Historical TEI emphasis on capturing of extant documents probably explains this & lack of good meta-data.

SB raised issue of how much the Guidelines should lean on SVG as the method of providing either meta-data, a mechanism to point to and from an image, or both:

The Guidelines should recommend SVG as the solution, and simply not mention any others; essentially discuss SVG as if it were the only solution
The Guidelines should be very generic: ‘if you have wrapped your raster image in an XML document that allows association of areas of the image with an XML ID (e.g, using SVG) then you would point to it this way’ kinda stuff.
The Guidelines should point at that the general mechanism we discuss may be applicable to other formats, but that we are only going to discuss and provide examples for SVG.

(I don't recall an explicit vote or consensus, but have the feeling we agreed on #3.)

Suggestion to reverse order of image->text, text->image subsections; countered by CC because it's easier to build the didactic examples this way. Suggestion to put an introductory paragraph in describing the approach of the section with a brief explanation of why it's in this order.

Discussion of SVG's three ways to identify an image area. First two stay in. CC to consider whether or not it's appropriate to keep the 3rd, will post.

Action 1: CC Post thoughts on whether SVG's 3rd mechanism for identifying the area of an image (i.e., ‘view specification’) should be in Guidelines or not. 2003-06-24

Action 2: SB post specific suggestions we didn't have time to mention 2003-06-24

Action 3: SB post instructions for getting reimbursed for phone calls to list

Appendix A:

Wrapped up at 15:09. Next call 2003-06-27 13:00 (remember, times are UTC). Plan to continue discussion of so w 04, may or may not get to so w 06, noting that FV may not be present.