TEI: TEI Board Conference Call: 9 May 2006

Licensed under

Original text

16 September 2007 Converted to P5 9 May 2006

Chris RuotoloFirst draft from notes

Chris Ruotolo

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)
    Action items from last conference call

  • Minutes were approved, with no changes suggested.

  • SB reported on the meeting of the DLF-sponsored TEI in Libraries group, which took place in Washington, DC in February. Perry Willett, Natasha Smith, Matt Gibson, David Seaman, and Chris Powell were the other attendees. Minutes of the meeting have not yet been posted. The group worked on revisions to the TEI in Libraries document. They also discussed the possibility of creating a TEI Tight DTD that would reconcile some of the existing library keyboarding specifications. Since the February meeting, the conversation has continued over email. The next meeting is tentatively scheduled for June in New Orleans.

    DP noted that DLF leadership will change at the end of the year, and that DLF’s commitment should be locked in before that time. JU suggested moving the responsibility for TEI Tight off of Matt Gibson; JF suggested Natasha Smith as a possible replacement, stressing the TEI’s independent interest in a TEI Tight schema and the need for a point person who would consider the project from the TEI’s perspective. Chris Powell and Merrilee Proffitt were also mentioned as possible leaders for the project.

    Check in with Matt Gibson about work on TEI Tight, and possibly approach Natasha Smith about moving the project forward.

  • CR reported that OpenCMS has been installed on J2, the IATH test server. Amit Kumar and Shayne Brandon are working together to install Amit’s XML extension module for OpenCMS; the installation should be completed next week, at which point CR will move test pages and stylesheets over to J2 to test the functionality. JF and CR have been working to organize and draft content for the new site, which will be circulated to the Board for review.

    Discuss and set a deadline for presenting new website content to the Board for review

  • No discussion has yet taken place. Discuss the role of Executive Director.
  • No discussion has yet taken place. Review secretary language in the Bylaws to ensure that we are in compliance.
  • An online registration system will be in place for the 2006 Members’ Meeting, and registration fees will go into a PayPal account. PayPal accounts are easy and free to set up; the fee for each transaction is 3% plus $.30. DO noted that PayPal is controversial, in part because it is loosely regulated, but he suggested that we will probably be OK if we’re accepting donations rather than selling products. LB reiterated the suggestion that we explore the SourceForge mechanism for accepting donations. DO has investigated CaféPress and said there would be “no downside” to setting up a free site for selling TEI-branded t-shirts and mugs. JF emphasized that whatever donation system we pursue should also allow us to accept payment for conferences and memberships, and DO noted that both PayPal and Amazon would allow us to do that.

    DO mentioned the Mellon Foundation’s Research in Information Technology grant program. TEI might be eligible if we were to “project-ize” an aspect of technical development such as P5, ODD, or Roma. The RIT grant is oriented toward projects that produce customizable software, where it’s too expensive for any one group to do it. DO also mentioned the Canadian Foundation for Innovation (CFI) grant, but that requires a Canadian partner institution.

    The Board briefly discussed the challenges of getting Mellon funding. Mellon is inclined to give its money to universities rather than freestanding organizations like TEI, and they are reluctant to fund standards development. TEI’s most recent Mellon funding was in support of the Electronic Textual Editing book, which still isn’t out. JU mentioned that Mellon and IMLS are hosting a meeting in June to talk about the forthcoming ACLS report on cyberinfrastructure, which emphasizes standards work. JU will report back to the Board on how we might apply for funding. next meeting: report back about plans for packaging to foundations. look into PayPal, SourceForge donation system, and CaféPress

    New Business

  • JF reported that plans for the meeting are on track. The venue has been secured, the call for posters has been issued, and registration should open shortly. The planning team is working on securing sponsors. MZ has developed a prospectus that outlines what can be sponsored and at what cost. Possible sponsors include SyncRO Soft, Apex, and Amigos; academic institutions and publishers were also suggested. The possibility of a book exhibit was discussed briefly, with follow-up discussion relegated to email.

    JF noted that we did not receive the funding we requested for the meeting. We will need to contact the invited speakers (Liam Quin, Steve Ramsay, John Lavagnino, and Dan O’Donnell) to ensure that they are still willing to participate.

    19 May 2006Post an update on the meeting arrangments to the Board mailing list.

  • MZ and DO will communicate via email to discuss procedures for the Committee.

    Report on Nominations Committee

  • The TEI Council meeting will take place in Kyoto on May 18th-19th. Christian Wittern has a grant to cover travel expenses for five Council members; TEI will cover the rest. The meeting will coincide with TEI Day in Japan. The first part of the day will feature presentations by Japanese TEI users, while the afternoon will feature presentations by several members of the Council.

  • It was suggested that James Cummings might be willing to draft a plan describing usage of the logos.

    Approach James about drafting recommendations for using the “P5-ready” logo and TEI file icon, and circulate these to the Board.

  • LB reported that he’s had no feedback regarding the ISO agreement. He noted that the agreement doesn’t obligate us to much, and doesn’t prevent us from doing anything either. In early discussions with ISO, they seemed to be asserting ownership of pieces of the TEI; this agreement assures that we get to keep anything we make.

    MZ then called a vote on officially endorsing the ISO agreement, and the motion carried unanimously.

  • JF discussed the status of the internationalization proposal. There still seems to be some confusion on the ALLC’s part about what we proposed, but hopefully they will discuss and vote on the proposal at their July meeting in Paris. JF has been in frequent communication with the ALLC to emphasize how much public support and excitement the internationalization proposal has generated. Alternate funding possibilites were discussed. The technical aspects of the project could be pitched to Mellon, perhaps under the RIT grant discussed earlier. The amount of money required is fairly modest (about $10,000 USD).

  • No action on the recruiting strategy so far. Review the strategy and start assigning tasks; discuss how to move forward with the recruiting plan. Review former plans about individual memberships.

  • MZ mentioned that he will be in Bergen and Kyoto in the next couple of weeks, and that this will be a good opportunity for recruiting new TEI members. He asked about the fee schedule for different levels of membership. JF noted that the “div” system for prospective members is basically an honor system, as numbers about TEI users are rough and hard to verify. She suggested proposing a div level that’s likely to be appropriate, and allowing prospective members some flexibility in joining at a higher or lower level.

The meeting adjourned at approximately 1600 UTC.