TEI-C Board of Directors teleconference, 10 Feb 2009
Lou Burnard
Certification of the meeting

The meeting began at approximately 13:00 GMT, with the following members present: Lou Burnard (LB), Julia Flanders (JF), Daniel O'Donnell (DO), Daniel Pitti (DP); Christian Wittern (CW) was present but for technical reasons unable to speak; Susan Schreibman was present in part; apologies had been received from Chris Ruotolo; John Unsworth (JU) was present for the discussion of TEI Tite.

Approval of agenda

The meeting agenda was approved.

Review of minutes from previous meeting

The minutes from the last meeting were accepted.

Actions

A projected budget for 2009 is now available in the private area of the Board website

Reports
Chairs Report

DO summarised the material in this report. The Board noted its content with thanks.

Treasurers Report

DP reported that $36k of the Mellon grant of $165k was currently frozen until September, due to a missed reporting deadline.

Membership Report

In Veronika/Bertrand's absence, DP reported that two memberships had not been renewed this year.

Web Committee

Chris had posted a brief report prior to the meeting. DO complimented her on implementation of the RSS newsfeed and asked how material was added to it. (CR subsequently stated that for now this should be done via email to her)

SIGS

In Susan's absence, DO noted that a request for an initial grant had been received from the Manuscript SIG and this was in process. LB commented that a proposal for a new SIG on transcribed speech was in preparation. JF said that a third proposal, for a SIG on electronic publishing issues, was also in preparation.

TEI Tite Proposal

Due to other commitments, DO had been unable to circulate the documents relating to this proposal until the day before the meeting. He was now seeking approval in principle from the Board to move forward with the draft RFP as soon as possible, with a view to signing off its wording at the Board meeting scheduled for 10 March.

The Board discussed the proposal in general terms only. DO said that the survey results indicated there was a clear demand for digitization services amongst the membership. The RFP was agnostic about how that service might be provided, leaving it to vendors to quote prices for a range of business models: aggregation by the TEI was not the only possible model. DO noted that respondents were evenly divided between those who preferred to deal directly with vendors and those who did not. JU commented that the price to members would be lower in the aggregation model. DP commented that the cost of providing an aggregation service still needed to be factored. LB asked whether a risk analysis had been included in the work. DO noted that providing realtime reliable information about membership status was currently difficult; the Board felt this should be addressed independently should not affect the issue.

The Board agreed that the revision process for the RFP should begin without delay. All Board members are requested to review the documents, in particular the Draft RFP and associated briefing notes, within the next ten days if possible, after which work on the next draft will begin. Legal opinion was also currently being sought on the draft. LB undertook to place the relevant documents in the private area of the Board's website (now done).

action: board members to review and comment on draft RFP by 20 Feb 09

COC Proposal

JF reported that there had been some helpful discussion of this on the list which had led her to conclude that the current proposal was maybe too detailed. It was agreed that we needed to consider some of the larger issues of where our outreach activities could be improved, looking at the bigger picture. The ideas in the current proposal would not be lost, but needed broader contextualisation.

JF agreed to co-ordinate an email discussion of outreach issues, with a view to identifying and prioritizing gaps in our current provision, and hence making recommendations for action, hopefully by the April board meeting. The Board agreed that the 3K previously allocated should remain "outreach-encumbered" but not yet disbursed.

action: JF to kick-start board discussion of outreach activities sticky-note stylee.

Licensing policy

LB raised this issue in his email of 2009-02-03, following an enquiry from Fabio Ciotti about updating his translation of TEI Lite for a new publication, and a second enquiry from Marcus Bingenheimer about publishing a new Chinese translation of it. DO had also received an enquiry from Ciotti, giving further detail of what he planned.

It was agreed that DO would write to Bonnard to enquire about the status of the royalty payments previously agreed under the terms of the contract made with them in 2004. LB would draft responses to Ciotti and to Bingenheimer and post them to the Board list for approval before sending them.

action: DO and LB to write letters

Funding for conftool

The Board was asked to authorise expenditure of about $350 as a licence fee for conftool, to assist in management of the next MM. LB asked whether this was a one-off or a recurrent payment. In general, the Board agreed that this payment should come out of the Conference budget rather than elsewhere. It was agreed notwithstanding that the Treasurer was able to authorize disbursement of modest sums (up to $500) without reference to the Board. DO agreed to update the Procedures Document accordingly.

action: DO to update Procedures Document

Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 1450 GMT.

Last recorded change to this page: 2009-02-04  •  For corrections or updates, contact web@tei-c.org