TEI: TEI Board Conference Call: 29 January 2007

Licensed under

Original text

16 September 2007 Converted to P5 29 January 2007

First draft from notes

Chris Ruotolo

The meeting commenced shortly after 1700 UTC, with the following in attendance:

  • Syd Bauman (SB)
  • Julia Flanders (JF)
  • John Lavagnino (JL)
  • Daniel O’Donnell (DO)
  • Daniel Pitti (DP)
  • Chris Ruotolo (CR)
  • John Unsworth (JU)
  • Ray Siemens (RS)

Lou Burnard (LB) and Sebastian Rahtz (SR) joined the call near the end.

  • DO reported that setting up a CaféPress site would be quick and easy if we wanted to pursue it. No cash outlay is involved; we would buy items from them at a steep markup, and anything we make over that would be profit. CaféPress sends a check with the proceeds each month. JF suggested assigning this to an enthusiastic group of people who can generate ideas from the community and run them by the Board. Mugs with the TEI or P5 logo seem the obvious item to start with. Sales of funny/interesting T-shirts could be healthy and instill a spirit of fun and participation in the TEI. The Board agreed to start with a basic mug with the TEI logo. DO will arrange it. He will need banking info from DP. Arrange with CaféPress to sell a basic mug with the TEI logo.

    There was a PayPal account set up for the 2006 MM in Victoria. DP hasn’t seen any money come in through it. JF noted that one or two people registered for the 2006 MM through PayPal. The money doesn’t come by check, but stays in the account until you do something with it, so someone needs to check our PayPal account to see if there are funds in it. JF noted that people in other parts of the world have trouble using PayPal. There are alternatives in Europe and elsewhere that we might explore. DO asked if we could arrange to accept credit cards directly. People can do wire transfers or checks, but it’s expensive. Continue the discussion of online payment.

    DO reported on the P5 logo. The logo itself could be completed quickly; the more difficult part is deciding what constitutes P5 conformance. The Council is currently discussing this issue.

  • The medium term discussion has been moving along via email. SR still intends to write a statement. There will be another teleconference on this topic in about three weeks. More discussion over email would be welcome, even while papers are coming in.

  • JF and SB have made changes to the SOP document and posted it to the website for review. The document will be finalized by the end of February, so any comments or suggestions must be made in the next week or two. After that time, the document will be moved to the Consortium section of the website, so that the public can access it. SB suggested that the Board look carefully at the reimbursement section and discuss it. This is a good opportunity for all Board members to refamiliarize themselves with the standard operating procedures. 28 February 2007Finalize SOP document and move it to the Consortium section.
  • The committee consists of RS (chair), JF, Christian Wittern, and Ariana Ciula. RS will wait a few weeks before sending out the call for nominations. The deadline will be June 1, and RS will report back to the Board after that date.
  • The Council is serious about getting P5 done by October. There is an ad-hoc planning committee to manage the push toward completion. An ordered list of tasks to be completed will soon go to the editors for review. Council expects to have a project plan up by early next week, and to assign tasks. A small group of Council members (not the editors) will focus on publication formats.
  • JU has been in touch with Perry Trolard, who finished the work he was assigned. JU has asked Perry to write summaries to accompany his results, for different audiences: one for DLF, to explain some of the choices made in reducing the three schemas down to one; and one for Council, to explain the purpose of TEI Tight, how it is different from TEI Lite, and why we need both. Perry is working on it and should be done by the end of the month; finished documents will be sent to Matt Gibson, Christian Wittern, and SB. DP asked if the finished product will be reviewed by the three institutions who contributed their schemas; JU will ask Perry to include a statement in the documents for DLF, suggesting that the three institutions would be well suited to review the work. The next step is to work with vendors to negotiate a discount for projects using the standard. TEI could play an aggregator role in which we would gather keyboarding material from small encoding projects and serve as the point of contact with the vendors. By the end of spring we could have the basic outlines and agreements and documents in place; we could start promoting it over the summer, and emphasize it at the next MM. mid-March 2007Try to have a TEI Tight plan for the Council to review before its next meeting; encourage PT to stick to his deadline.

  • No action on this yet. DO mentioned that Lethbridge might be interested in becoming a TEI host institution. Lethbridge has a new documentation and archiving program, so this might be a likely area for an in-kind contribution.
  • SR sent an email to the Board summarizing the substantial progress on the MM.

    DO asked about the possible TEI event in Taiwan. JF reported that Professor Fu has expressed strong interest in hosting a 20th anniversary event in the fall, and combining it with a TEI training workshop. JF will nudge if she doesn’t hear back from him. SR suggested waiting until after the MM date is finalized (likely to be the first weekend in November).

    Discussion of soliciting bids for the 2008 MM. The TEI Chair sends out the call for bids in early spring. In the past it has gone out in March, but there’s no disadvantage to doing it sooner. Sending out a reminder after the initial call is a good idea. We should stress that we are seeking a location somewhere other than North America in 2008. JF will send DO last year’s call for bids as a model. March 2007Send out the call for bids for the 2008 Members’ Meeting.

  • JF, JU, and JL reported on the status of the granting committee. JF sent a list of relevant US funding and deadlines to JL. DO noted that many post-P5 activities will be grant fundable and suggested that we might want to wait until after the P5 completion before actively pursuing any grants. JF mentioned the NEH digital humanities startup grants ($30K, April deadline); this is the kind of thing we could probably get if we applied for it. DP mentioned a new IMLS and NEH grant program focused on collaborative digital initiatives between cultural heritage institutions, scholars, and IT. DO again questioned whether we have sufficient time and resources to pursue such grants at this time, but DP noted that grants bring in a lot of money relative to other fundraising. Gathering information about grants, or providing a list of TEI-related activities that have been funded by grants in the past, could be a member benefit.

    JF noted that NEH and IMLS grants have a long lead time, and that the monies must be awarded to institutions and not the TEI directly. The I18N grant came from ALLC, which made it easy to get the funds quickly. It would be very useful to identify more potential funding organizations like ALLC. We should remind TEI members that the we can help them write their grants, and that they can include TEI membership in their proposals.

    DO asked the fundraising committtee to develop a strategy for pursuing grants. JL volunteered. February 2007Draft a strategy statement for how the TEI should go about taking advantage of grants.

  • CR gave an update on the website work. The basic Open CMS setup is done, and the test site has been moved back to the jefferson server. Test content is being loaded. DO and James Cummings have provided detailed feedback on the interface. CR is working on recruiting more local help with the project. The Board agreed that the site must be completed before the 2007 MM. A professional-looking site will be crucial for fundraising. Completion over the summer would be ideal. LB asked about current maintenance of the site; CR said that maintenance requests could be sent to her.

  • There was no time for the longer term discussion of editor, host, and officer contributions and commitments, but this issue needs to be kept on the Board’s agenda.

    DP and SB discussed how to administer the $20K in grant money for internationalization. Individuals can invoice the TEI as they complete their work, but DP would like to see a budget in advance so he knows what to expect. SR will send email to the Board pointing to the project outline, which includes an itemization. JF noted that the budget doesn’t break it down by language, or specifics. SR will make sure that groups have a clear notion of what they’re getting.

    The meeting adjourned 1808 UTC.

The meeting adjourned at approximately 1800 UTC.