JC> Re: html:* passthrough.
JC> Sure, but I know SPQR used it for things locally in Oxford as
JC> well. But you could probably remove without side-effect. I doubt
JC> many other people are using them. (Though, how would we know?)
I have no plans to change it. Just to chuckle at it.
JC> re: highlighting github lines in a link.
JC> Cool isn't it. ;-) ...
Way
JC> Re: nuking ref
JC> I'm assuming you mean only the ones wrapped around gi? As there
JC> are some (pointing to things like classes etc) that we do need,
JC> obviously.
I am going to process <ident type="class"> to <a>, too, so would nuke
those. Those around <att> and <title> would have to stay put.
JC> Let me know if I can help,
Yes -- what should the *content* of the new
<a class="X" href="http://VAULT/VERSION/ref-THING.html">
(where X is either "gi" or "class") be? I am guessing
<duck>
for an element, and just the name of the class (e.g., att.quack or
model.webbed.feet) for a class. Let me know if that's not right.
Also, I have not even thought about what, if anything, should be done
to the CSS.
EM> ... [the "Raven" release.]
I like it. (But of course I would, I suggested it. :-) Does mean we
have to really try to get it out on Mon 29 Jan.
EM> Please do not commit any further changes, unless they are to the
EM> release notes or unless you communicate first with the release
EM> technicians or the chair. Release technicians are Hugh Cayless
EM> and myself.
I probably won't be done with this README change for an hour or two,
anyway. But the questions are, when I'm done
a) do we want to try to release on Monday with the new code or not?
b) if yes, to which branch should I commit it?
(And of course, the corresponding changes to the README .xml
files themselves should go to the equivalent branch, but one is
in Stylesheets/, the other in TEI/.)
c) if no, to which branch should I commit it? (dev, right?)
_______________________________________________
Tei-council mailing list
Tei-council@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council