The meeting commenced shortly after 1500 UTC, with the following in attendance:
- Syd Bauman (SB)
- Lou Burnard (LB)
- Julia Flanders (JF)
- John Lavagnino (JL)
- Veronika Lux (VL)
- Daniel O’Donnell (DO)
- Daniel Pitti (DP)
- Sebastian Rahtz (SR)
- Chris Ruotolo (CR)
- John Unsworth (JU)
- Matt Zimmerman (MZ)
The original agenda was modified due to time constraints.
JF reported that the conference program committee has worked out an advantageous arrangement with the hotel and will sign the contract within the next week. The room rate of $90 CAD ($75 USD) is quite reasonable and if a minimum of 80 guest rooms are booked, the cost of the meeting rooms will be reduced from $3200 to $1300. The committee has talked about having the Text Analysis Developers Alliance (TADA) meeting colocated with the TEI meeting, which would help increase the number of attendees. The next step is to start working on the program, which will depend somewhat on the fate of the grant funding request. The meeting will be held on 27-28 October 2006, with the Board meeting on the 29th.
JF mentioned the draft meeting protocol document and asked for input. She noted that the Board list discussion about possibly making the meeting more conference-like is relevant here, and that the protocol document should not be finalized until that discussion is resolved.
JU talked to some GSLIS instructors about making this a graduate class project, but the timing couldn’t be worked out. JU will get an update on the current state of affairs from Perry Willett. He will also ask Wendell Piez what it would cost to have Mulberry reconcile the various TEI subsets, which would avoid the need for a committee and allow us to put a proposal in front of libraries quickly.
LB noted overlap with projects already underway: for example, M. Driscoll’s personography work item for the Council and L. Romary’s group looking at TEI headers for grey literature. LB mentioned that he is also working on a new P5-compliant version of TEI Lite, and suggested that all these activities should be coordinated.
DP recommended Elizabeth Shaw as a freelance consultant who might be a good choice for the reconcilliation work. LB noted that we have no budget for this work in 2006. SB mentioned a Digital Library Federation (DLF) meeting on this topic on 12-13 February 2006; he will attend, along with David Seaman, Matt Gibson, Perry Willett, and others. SB will explain what a P5 “TEI Tight” might look like, and thinks the meeting will focus on working out a spec. JU suggested that TEI and DLF could split the cost of a consultant, if necessary.
28 February 2006Report on DLF meeting to the Board and Council
JU stressed the goal of this work: to provide a member benefit specifically aimed at smaller projects so they can negotiate with participating vendors to have keyboarding done according to a uniform spec at reduced cost.
JU summarized two questions from email discussion about MLA’s forthcoming Electronic Textual Editing (ETE): whether to include the PDF version of P4 on the CD along with the HTML version, and whether to include a current snapshot of P5 or just a reference to it. The Board debated the latter question, with LB arguing for including the snapshot in the interest of dissemination, and JF arguing that the version of P5 on the CD may become instantiated in a “bizarrely anachronistic way”. DO suggested that URLs for the Guidelines be prominent on the CD label, thus encouraging people to get the info online. LB agreed that it’s important that the Board review the CD label and the introductory page in advance.
MZ called a vote on a recommendation for including a snapshot of P5 on the CD. The motion carried 5-4, with MZ, DO, JL, VL, and SR voting in favor. MZ then called a second vote on whether to include the PDF version of P4 on the CD. The motion carried 8-1, with SR against and all others in favor.
DO suggested linking heavily to the website, as the PDF is good for printing but otherwise not as useful as the online version. LB quoted from the proposed index page, which emphasizes the HTML.
The Board briefly discussed the new site design. MZ asked if usability experts were involved in the design and suggested that this would be a good idea. SR asked how the site is currently delivered, and CR replied that currently static HTML pages are generated from TEI source using Saxon. SR asked how navigation is to be generated, at which point MZ proposed that the rest of the design discussion be shifted to email.
The Board discussed the possibility of purchasing a dedicated server for the TEI website. LB pointed out that the server decision depends on which technology is chosen for the website. SR added that if the Board is to pay for a server, it must have a say in the technology. JU noted that the decisions about the server and the delivery technology are intimately linked. He proposed that a subgroup (JU, SR, CR, Amit Kumar, Shayne Brandon) discuss the issues further and report back to the Board as a plan takes shape. This will be a standing action item for the next few Board meetings.
?Continue to discuss website server and technology issues and report back to the Board.
VL has drafted a recruiting strategy document, which will be posted to the website and discussed over email.
MZ presented two fundraising ideas: a PayPal donation button on the TEI website, and TEI-branded items for sale, perhaps through a CafePress store. SR noted that the TEI SourceForge page provides a donation mechanism which has not yet been exploited. JF suggested setting up the TEI website to accept credit cards, which would streamline membership payment; DP pointed out that this may run afoul of Virginia policy and must be investigated.
JF emphasized the need for more substantive fundraising in addition to the two strategies proposed above, and identified $200,000 per year as a target figure for keeping the TEI stable and solvent.
?Look into setting up a donation system and a CafePress store
This action item will be carried over to the next Board meeting. JU mentioned that rules about TEI’s non-profit status affect what interest it can earn. DP praised Nancy’s new membership database.
?Discuss with Bank of America how we might invest the balance forward, so that it earns interest.
After a brief discussion, the Board decided not to bother with revising the Bylaws. MZ, JF, VL, and DP will discuss the role of Executive Director. MZ and CR will review the Secretary language in the Bylaws to ensure that we are in compliance.
?Discuss the role of Executive Director. ?Review secretary language in the Bylaws to ensure that we are in compliance.
DO asked about procedures for the nominating committee, and MZ agreed to work with him on that issue.
LB will re-post notes about his correspondence with ISO regarding rights associated with the P5 feature structures chapter, for discussion over email.
The Board agreed to hold quarterly conference calls, and MZ will schedule the next one.