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

correspAction@type
by Peter Stadler 13 Mar '15

13 Mar '15

The last changes made by Lou introduced the suggested values „sentBy“ „deliveredTo“ etc. to correspAction@type [1]. I’d like to propose skipping the preposition and simply call those „sent“, „delivered“ etc. because we usually describe three things within <correspAction>, i.e. the date, the place and the actor. Since there is not one preposition that (grammatically) fits all items, and because I like the analogy with email terminology, I think it’s best to only have „sent“, „received“, „forwarded“, „redirected“ and „transmitted“. Cheers Peter [1] http://teijenkins.hcmc.uvic.ca/job/TEIP5/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/relea…

3 3

next oXygen release
by James Cummings 28 Feb '15

28 Feb '15

As I was asking them about something they told me would be in the oXygen 17 release (being able to populate oXygen forms properties from remote files, e.g. in lists of attribute values from a remote file being used in a dropdown menu) I happen to ask them when oXygen 17 was planned. George answered saying: On 28/02/15 16:16, oXygen XML Editor Support (George Bina) wrote:> Hi James, > > We plan oXygen 17 for end of April / beginning of May. > > Best Regards, > George So that is after our intended release... so let's make that release on time!! -James -- Dr James Cummings, James.Cummings(a)it.ox.ac.uk Academic IT Services, University of Oxford

2 1

msDesc proposal
by Martin Holmes 28 Feb '15

28 Feb '15

I seem to be unable to comment on the msDesc proposal here: <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bpBPughQp5sOoB13iTMHMeRd88Mjv12_eGZiQXY…> so I'll raise a quick question here. I'm a bit confused about the second definition; where it says: "In this case, the original manuscript is being encoded with msPart in order to provide information about the dispersed parts, or one distinct part is being encoded." Does this mean that, conceivably, the "larger original manuscript" is being encoded with a _single_ msPart, or that it's being encoded with a _series_ of msPart elements, one for each component? Cheers, Martin

5 9

Friday's Telecon; Agenda Items?
by Hugh Cayless 27 Feb '15

27 Feb '15

Dear all, A reminder that our next teleconference will be this Friday, February 27, at 05:30 PST | 08:30 EST | 13:30 GMT | 14:30 CET. I've posted a draft agenda at http://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/Council_agenda_2015-02 Please add, remove, or modify agenda items as necessary. There are a couple of items we could profitably discuss beforehand on-list, including the transcription of spoken language draft and the suggested msPart updates. All the best, Hugh

5 6

My Conference Info
by Hugh Cayless 27 Feb '15

27 Feb '15

Hi all, I’m having trouble finding the list of international numbers on the Economy Conference Call site, but here’s what was in the email they sent me. You should be able to dial the toll free (US, so prefix +1) number using Skype. Toll-Free: 866-906-0040 Toll: 857-288-2640 Code: 5753850 Here’s the set of number changes that John forwarded me: Locale Old Dialed Number New Dialed Number GERMANY (Land) 08001820270 08001800565 GERMANY (Mobile) 08001820270 08001814978 UK (London Local) 442034785604 442033186423

3 3

Agenda for Friday's Telecon
by Hugh Cayless 27 Feb '15

27 Feb '15

Hi all, I’ve put up an agenda for our teleconference on Friday, Jan 30 at 14:00 GMT: http://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/Council_agenda_2015-01 <http://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/Council_agenda_2015-01> It’s mostly a copy of the previous one, on the assumption that we probably didn’t make much progress over the holidays and the review will likely be good for all of us, especially our new members. Please do add new items for discussion (or remove items there’s nothing to report on). It will take me a while to figure out how things work, so reminders of anything I may have missed, or suggestions for how things might be done better are most welcome! All the best, Hugh

8 17

Minutes Link
by Hugh Cayless 27 Feb '15

27 Feb '15

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bfUCykhiABF7JP_KqSyprrI8n-qgcnMstJhBOuV…

1 0

feedback requested
by Lou Burnard 26 Feb '15

26 Feb '15

Could someone please comment on my proposed actions concerning this longstanding FR? https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/480/ It's the one about classifying the use of @hand better...

2 1

F2F poll results
by Hugh Cayless 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

Looks like we have (sort of) a winner: the week of April 27–May 1. Raffaele marked "if need be" for the 27th–29th and Lou and Fabio for the 29th–May 1. How much of a problem are those conflicts? In particular, would travel to the US or Europe make them impossible? If I’m not mistaken, these are the offers to host we’ve had so far: ## US Boston (Syd) College Park (Raffaele) Ann Arbour (Paul) ## Canada Victoria (Martin) ## Europe Mainz (Peter) Estonia (maybe…) Is that correct? Other takers or ideas? Hugh /** * Hugh A. Cayless, Ph.D * hugh.cayless(a)duke.edu * Duke Collaboratory for Classics Computing (DC3) * http://blogs.library.duke.edu/dcthree/ **/

11 59

Suggested typology for correspAction
by Lou Burnard 18 Feb '15

18 Feb '15

I'd like to propose some change to this. Firstly I find the current descriptions of the various valItems a bit cumbersome and non-idiomatic. e.g. "identifies a/the sending action of the message" The use of "a/the" for "a or the" is not something we do elsewhere, nor do I think it necessary here. It's not obvious what "the sending action of the message" means either -- the message is not carrying out the sending! The description should explain what this value of the @type attribute implies, and therefore in what circumstances it should be chosen. I suggest something like "information concerning the creation or authorship of a message". I'd prefer to see the suggested values as nouns rather than gerunds, as elsewhere. So "despatch" rather than "sending", "receipt" rather than "receiving". (But I appreciate that this may cause some upsets in existing data) I would like to see a suggestion for the "authoring" correspAction, since the text does talk about this (when introducing use of @sameAs) The distinction between "receiving" and "transmitting" needs to be clarified. I would say the same for the distinction between "redirecting" and "forwarding", except that I am not sure that I know what the distinction is in that case. So, my revised valList for correspAction/@type looks like this: <valList type="semi" mode="add"> <valItem ident="creation"> <desc versionDate="2015-02-09" xml:lang="en"> information concerning the creation or authorship of a message</desc> </valItem> <valItem ident="despatch"> <desc versionDate="2015-02-09" xml:lang="en"> information concerning the sending or despatch of a message</desc> </valItem> <valItem ident="receipt"> <desc versionDate="2015-02-09" xml:lang="en"> information concerning the receipt of a message</desc> </valItem> <valItem ident="transmission">  <desc versionDate="2015-02-09" xml:lang="en"> information concerning the transmission of a message after it has been despatched</desc> </valItem> <valItem ident="redirection">  <desc versionDate="2015-02-09" xml:lang="en"> information concerning the redirection or forwarding of a message </desc> </valItem> </valList>

6 14