% Received: from UICVM by UICVM (Mailer R2.02) with BSMTP id 5184; Mon, 24 Apr 89
%  12:36:06 CDT
% Received: from tut.cis.ohio-state.edu by UICVM.uic.edu (IBM VM SMTP R1.2) with
%  TCP; Mon, 24 Apr 89 12:36:00 CST
% Received: from bucatina.cis.ohio-state.edu by tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
% (5.59/3.890421)
%       id AA01028; Mon, 24 Apr 89 13:35:57 EDT
% Received: by bucatina.cis.ohio-state.edu (3.2/2.890120)
%       id <AA05920@bucatina.cis.ohio-state.edu>; Mon, 24 Apr 89 13:34:09 EDT
% Date: Mon, 24 Apr 89 13:34:09 EDT
% From: Sandy Mamrak <mamrak@cis.ohio-state.edu>
% Message-Id: <8904241734.AA05920@bucatina.cis.ohio-state.edu>
% To: u35395@uicvm.uic.edu
% Subject: statement of work for ML committee
% Cc: mamrak@cis.ohio-state.edu
%
% Below find my revised statement of work for the ML committee.  If it
% is still not satisfactory, please let me know, and I will take one
% more cut at it.  I did not address the issues raised by the AB about
% the power of SGML re ambiguity and simultaneous markup since these are
% addressed properly in the guidelines themselves.
%
%
\documentstyle[12pt]{article}
\begin{document}

\hyphenation{Com-pu-ter-Pro-cess-able}

\begin{center}

{\small \bf TEI Metalanguage Committee: Statement of Work}

S.A. Mamrak\\
The Ohio State University\\

Document Number: TEI MLR1

DRAFT --\today

\end{center}

Below we describe the tasks of the Metalanguage (ML) committee.  We
assume that SGML will serve as the basis for the interchange format
for the TEI project.

\section{Task 1: SGML Guidelines}

The Metalanguage committee will generate a set of guidelines for
writing SGML Document Type Definitions, DTDs, and instances of DTDs.

\section{Task 2: Metalanguage Development}

The Metalanguage committee will develop a formal metalanguage for the
description of existing encoding schemes.  A survey of existing
schemes will be undertaken prior to the development of the
metalanguage.  The choice of schemes to be included in the survey will
be determined by the following criteria: 1) the scheme is judged to be
sufficiently representative of encoding in the domain by the
Metalanguage Committee, 2) sufficient documentation of the scheme can
be obtained; and 3) electronic versions of data encoded with the scheme
can be obtained.

\section{Plan of Action}

The SGML guidelines will be generated primarily by the ML committee
head, in cooperation with, and concensus from, all committee members.
The first version of these guidelines will be presented officially to
the TEI in June, 1989.  It is anticpated that three tasks will emerge
as necessary to implement the SGML guidelines: 1) the acquisition or
development of software environments for generating DTDs and their
instances; 2) the formal specification of all TEI DTDs, using the
respective environment; and 3) the formal specification of all TEI
instances of DTDs, using the respective environment. As the exact
descriptions of these tasks become available, members of the ML
committee will be assigned to their execution.

With respect to the metalanguage, a proposal will be generated for the
lanaguage primarily by the ML committee head, in cooperation with, and
concensus from, all committee members.  The first version of this
proposal will be presented officially to the TEI in September, 1989.
The primary task that will emerge as a result of the proposal is to
test the power and applicability of the metalanguage with respect to
currently existing encoding schemes.

To date, we have gathered at Ohio State University sufficient
documentation and electronic versions of encoded data for each of the
following schemes: (1) Lancaster-Oslo-Bergen Corpora of Modern
English, (2) COCOA, (3) Scribe, (4) Dictionary of the Old Spanish
Language, (5) Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, and (6) WATCON.

We have considered and decided to exclude from the testing phase the
following schemes, basically because they appear to us to be so
similar to the schemes we have chosen and likely will add no
additional information to our analysis: (1) Brown Corpus, (2) General
Inquirer, (3) Aramaic Lexicon, and the text-formatters (4) SCRIPT/GML,
(5) \LaTeX, and (6) troff.  After the testing phase, however, all
these schemes may eventually be translated to the metalanguage, as the
needs of TEI members dictate.

The committee will be polled for advice and consensus on the choice of
schemes and suggestions for adding new ones.  Once a metalanguage
proposal is in place, members of the ML committee will be assigned to
encode existing schemes, other than those mentioned above, using the
metalanguage.

\end{document}
