Working on ruby glosses, I think it is quite useful to say in the prose of CO things like “the following example” or “the example above”. I note that the “Examples” subsection of the “Style Notes” section of TCW 20<https://teic.github.io/TCW/tcw20.html> (why don’t these <div>s have IDs?) says in the very first paragraph not to do that. However, it is clear to me that the rest of that paragraph is about examples in tagdocs, not examples in the prose of the Guidelines. Furthermore, I think the logic (someone might come along later and add an example) at best does not really apply here in the prose (where being able to differentiate examples is useful), and at worst is basically silly. (I very vaguely remember the argument in favor of this restriction, and begrudgingly agreeing to it; but I cannot find the reasoning that led me to that agreement now, nor can I recall if it was intended for only tagdocs or for examples in the prose, too :-)
That said, why don’t we have a mechanism for referring to specific examples?
Hi all,
Thanks for the feedback on the location for the Ruby prose. The
consensus is clear -- it should be in core -- and the comments suggest
that the most appropriate approach will be to integrated it with the
content relating to glosses, which is currently in 3.3.4, "Terms,
Glosses, Equivalents, and Descriptions". That sub-subsection is already
quite long, so what I propose to attempt is this:
Take 3.3.4 "Terms, Glosses, Equivalents, and Descriptions" and 3.3.5
"Some Further Examples" and make them into a new subsection (i.e. one
level higher), which will become 3.4.
Title the new section "Terms, Glosses, Equivalents, Descriptions, and
Ruby". (JJ suggests that terms belongs elsewhere, but that would be a
major reorg, and I don't think we have time for that right now.)
Create subsections:
3.4.1 "Terms and Glosses" covering the first part of what is now 3.3.4.
This would also include the "Further Examples" bit, which is
really an extension of this.
3.4.2 "Ruby Annotations" containing the new prose already proposed.
3.4.3 "Equivalents and Descriptions" containing the part of what is now
3.3.4 which discusses altIdent, desc, and equiv; I think this is
a different topic, really, from glossing terms.
I'm doing this work in a separate branch:
<https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/tree/issue-2054-ruby>
which I'll merge dev into steadily as I go, to minimize later merge
conflicts. I'll also set up a build job for this branch on my Jenkins
when the initial work is done.
The time is relatively short, but I think we can get there before the
freeze.
I'll post the meat of this on the ticket too, for the record.
Cheers,
Martin
--
-------------------------------------
Humanities Computing and Media Centre
University of Victoria
mholmes(a)uvic.ca
Hi all,
Our Spec files (P5/Source/Specs/*.xml) all link to the NVDL schema here:
<http://jenkins.tei-c.org/job/TEIP5-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/P5/rele…>
That generates an error in itself, because the Jenkins server gives a
308 Permanent Redirect to https.
But if you do retrieve the schema and try to validate with it in Oxygen,
you get (or at least, I get) the error:
IllegalStateException - getSchemaProperties requires a schema
I'm not sure why that is -- anybody know?
It makes it a bit difficult to work on Spec files. What are people doing
to validate their Spec files at the moment?
Cheers,
Martin
--
------------------------------------------
Martin Holmes
UVic Humanities Computing and Media Centre
Dear all,
During the VF2F meeting this weekend, we agreed to do more short virtual F2F meetings as long as we can't do in-person meetings.
Please fill in the doodle for our next short VF2F meeting (end of March / April): https://doodle.com/poll/dc68qph9py96w39f?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=link.
The procedure is the same as last time: the North American Group starts on Friday, the European Group continues on Saturday morning and the full Council meets in the "afternoon" (morning for PST and EST).
Best,
Martina
Meg and I plan to finish up work on ticket #2010 on Mon evening 08 Feb (ET), and create a PR at that time. We are hoping it can be reviewed before the Council meeting on Thu 11 Feb.
(If you don’t want to wait, see branch megjbrownIssue2010.)
Hi all,
If you look at Peter's Jenkins, you'll see that the TEI-P5-Test-dev job
appears to succeed (it's green). However, the console log for the latest
build (653) shows 14 errors:
<https://jenkins.tei-c.org/job/TEIP5-Test-dev/653/parsed_console/>
On my Jenkins, the latest build (547) also fails, but differently:
<https://jenkins2.tei-c.org/job/TEIP5-Test-dev/547/parsed_console/>
I'm going to try to figure out why my build is failing, but I'm even
more puzzled by the main Jenkins, which seems to be giving the
impression that all is well. Peter, do you know what's happening here?
NVDL errors seem to be ignored.
Cheers,
Martin
--
------------------------------------------
Martin Holmes
UVic Humanities Computing and Media Centre
HI all,
As Elisa points out, Council can't vote on the original ticket because
it's not on the main TEI repo, so I've reposted it here:
<https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/issues/2054#issuecomment-770934282>
Please record your preferences for the location of the Ruby introductory
prose and other mentions/pointers to it. I'll also check Slack where
there's another poll under way. Doesn't matter which one you use.
Cheers,
Martin
--
-------------------------------------
Humanities Computing and Media Centre
University of Victoria
mholmes(a)uvic.ca
Friends,
I’m sorry but I have to apologise for the afternoon meeting. My wife got an appointment she can’t miss and I have to look after the kids.
Just wanted to let you know that I’ll miss your (virtual) company and to wish you a productive discussion!
Best
Peter
