May 2015 - Tei-council - lists.tei-c.org

ODD question
by Hugh Cayless 22 Jul '15

22 Jul '15

Hello all, Hope your trips home went well (or are going well). I’m having a hard time defining a new spec for <secl>. Does anybody know why https://github.com/hcayless/TEI-Guidelines/blob/secl/P5/Source/Specs/secl.x… <https://github.com/hcayless/TEI-Guidelines/blob/secl/P5/Source/Specs/secl.x…> wouldn’t be picked up by any of the build processes I’m running? It’s as though the file is invisible. There’s clearly some incantation I’m not including, but I don’t know what it is… Thanks, Hugh /** * Hugh A. Cayless, Ph.D * hugh.cayless(a)duke.edu * Duke Collaboratory for Classics Computing (DC3) * http://blogs.library.duke.edu/dcthree/ **/

9 36

New Jenkins build jobs for bleeding-edge and stable plugin
by Martin Holmes 04 Jun '15

04 Jun '15

Hi all, I have what looks like a working setup on my Jenkins box for building two versions of the Oxygen TEI plugin. The original build job, "oxygen-tei", to which some of you may have subscribed, is now replaced by "oxygen-tei-bleeding", to which you can subscribe here: <http://teijenkins.hcmc.uvic.ca/job/oxygen-tei-bleeding/lastSuccessfulBuild/…> while there is also now "oxygen-tei-stable", to which if you want you can subscribe here: <http://teijenkins.hcmc.uvic.ca/job/oxygen-tei-stable/lastSuccessfulBuild/ar…> The idea is that oxygen-tei-bleeding builds with the latest plugin code against the latest trunk builds of P5 and the Stylesheets, enabling us to see if any change to any of these has broken the plugin; oxygen-tei-stable builds with the latest plugin code, but against the current release versions of P5 and the Stylesheets, enabling us to see what a release version of the plugin would look like if either we or Syncro built one right now. The build is now being done with ant, and in addition to these two targets, there's also: ant syncro which builds a version for the Syncro folks using the latest stable P5 and Stylesheets, as they would do when creating a build for a new Oxygen release. Up to now they've been using our original update-and-upload.sh script, and then preventing it from uploading to SourceForge as it tries to do. That script also requires that you _know_ the correct versions of P5 and the Stylesheets, and supply them correctly on the command line; the new ant build script works that information out for itself. Finally, there is: ant stable which is what our release technician would use during a P5 release process, or what we would use to release an official build of our version of the plugin. This builds in the same way as the version above, but also offers to upload the result to SourceForge, and creates a new version of the updateSite.oxygen file which it offers to upload to tei-c.org. This should make releasing a new plugin version much easier, I hope (although it can only truly be tested for real when we come to release a version, so I'd like to be the one who runs it for real the first time in case something goes wrong). I've added the new job configs for Jenkins to SVN, where James can find them for the Oxford Jenkins, when he has the time. This is all brand-new and only gently tested, so let me know if you try anything, and please report any problems with as much detail as you can. Cheers, Martin

3 4

Re: [tei-council] [tei:feature-requests] #546 <defaultVal> should be removed from all specs
by Syd Bauman 03 Jun '15

03 Jun '15

Martin -- We'll talk tomorrow, I'm sure, but I'm not sure this is OK. I know you hate default values, as do I, and we want to get rid of them. But I'm not sure it's acceptable to yank them out w/o warning. DTD users might be upset. Besides, changing the semantics of a value like that is the sort of thing users need warning about. Those who actually have part="N" explicitly expressed may well be using it to say "I can't tell if this is a fragment or not". MH> att.fragmentable's @part now has no defaultVal, and the "N" value MH> now actually means "no", as it should. Rev 13232.

2 6

dataSpec content
by Lou Burnard 01 Jun '15

01 Jun '15

I'm still poking away at my datatype replacement ticket ... We agreed that <dataSpec> should be used to fully specify a TEI-defined datatype and also noted in passing that its existing <content> child needed additional constraints (e.g, it shouldnt allow you to supply elementRefs) In fact it seems to me that the "content" of a dataSpoe should be much more restrictive: I'd like for it to contain just <alternate>, <sequence>, <valList>, or <dataRef>, with the additional constraint that <alternate> and <sequence>s it contains can contain only one or more <dataRef>s If no-one has any counterproposal that's what i am planning to try to implement anyway.

2 1

Fast-track a simple ticket
by Martin Holmes 31 May '15

31 May '15

Hi all, This ticket: <https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/561/> arose out of our re-working yesterday of Laurent's standoff proposal. I'd like to fast-track it if we can; it seems straightforward to me, and doesn't involve any Birnbaum issues. While I get around to figuring out the actual change to the Spec file, could you all check to see if you have any objections to it in principle? Cheers, Martin

6 7

rng:group but no rng:choice
by Peter Stadler 31 May '15

31 May '15

I just stumbled across the content model of climate (and there are more …) which looks like <content> <rng:group> <rng:zeroOrMore> <rng:ref name="model.headLike"/> </rng:zeroOrMore> <rng:choice> <rng:group> <rng:oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="model.pLike"/> </rng:oneOrMore> </rng:group> <rng:group> <rng:oneOrMore> <rng:ref name="model.labelLike"/> </rng:oneOrMore> </rng:group> </rng:choice> <rng:zeroOrMore> <rng:choice> <rng:ref name="model.noteLike"/> <rng:ref name="model.biblLike"/> </rng:choice> </rng:zeroOrMore> <rng:zeroOrMore> <rng:ref name="climate"/> </rng:zeroOrMore> </rng:group> </content> My question is: is there some magic to the surrounding rng:group or could that be deleted? (I don’t intend to do so but was just wondering …) Best Peter

2 2

rework of standoff proposal
by Peter Stadler 31 May '15

31 May '15

Dear all, a Council working group (PFS, LB, MH, FC, SM, PWS) just created an alternative proposal as the "Ann Arbor" branch at https://github.com/laurentromary/stdfSpec/tree/AnnArbor. The changes in detail: * killed mapStruct * renamed annotationGrp —> listAnnotation * renamed model.annotationPart —> model.annotation * got rid of dash in module name * removed class att.confidence in favor of https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/561/ * added some more elements to model.annotation * removed standOffHeader in favor of teiHeader(!!) We did not update the examples yet. I’m curious about Laurent’s reaction and will probably have a conf call in the next week with him (— Laurent?!) Best Peter

5 12

Recommendations on values of @xml:id (FR #540)
by Raffaele Viglianti 31 May '15

31 May '15

Hi all, Martin Mueller asked on the list for recommendations on good uses of xml:ids, which resulted in a good discussion and a FR. I summarized the main suggestions on the ticket on SourceForge, but I post them here as well because I think we need to discuss this further, see below. The Guidelines already have some recommendations (numbering based on doc structure): * The Guidelines already suggest numbering based on doc structure ( http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/CO.html#CORS2) * Use 3 letters (e.g. from the title)+ 3 digits, incremental. E.g. HOL001, HOL002, etc.. * Same as above, but no fix number of digits. E.g. HOL1, HOL2, etc. * Prefix an id with name of element (this is simpler version of what the Guidelines already recommend) * Give tei:TEI an id and prefix every other id in the document with it (to guarantee cross-corpus uniqueness) These are all reasonable suggestions and there can be plenty more - which is why I think that the TEI should *not* give any recommendation on best practices for xml:id because it's a project management issue, not an encoding one. Myself, I prefer random ids, a practice that avoids introducing yet another level of complexity and data management. I understand the human readability, but sequences are too easily broken. And when parsing, relying on ID content instead of TEI content sounds like a bad idea.

7 16

Next defaultVal to be nuked
by Martin Holmes 30 May '15

30 May '15

I hereby nominate att.divLike/@org's defaultVal: <http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-att.divLike.html> This has its own novel brand of silliness: There are two values, and the first value, "composite", means "no claim is made about the sequence in which the immediate contents of this division are to be processed, or their inter-relationships." Yet THIS IS NOT THE DEFAULT VALUE; the _other_ one, "uniform", which _does_ make a claim, is the default. Well FFS. It shall die unless I hear otherwise in the next few hours. cheers, Martin

3 5

eXist-db password changed
by Peter Stadler 30 May '15

30 May '15

Sid argued strongly that we should change the admin password for the eXist-db that serves Roma (the issue arose around the discussion of tickets [feature-requests:#527] and [bugs:#747]). Hence, I duly changed the password and documented it as described in [1] and briefly checked that Roma still works. If you encounter any side effects, please let me know! Best Peter [1] http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/Council/Working/tcw22.xml

2 1