Re: [tei-council] rework of standoff proposal

Le 31 mai 2015 à 16:19, Peter Stadler a écrit :

I’m glad you like it :)

I’m d’accord with all of it but still feel a little bit uneasy about having teiHeader instead of standOffHeader because a teiHeader is „…making up an electronic title page for every TEI-conformant document.“ — and the standoff part does not need to be a TEI-conformant document (while it *can* be).

I perfectly understand.

So, I’d propose to keep the name standOffHeader and adjust the content model to macro.teiHeaderContent. (This macro is not in place yet but I think it’d be a good idea and it be constructed exactly as the current content model of teiHeader)

I would favor this option (= standOffHeader) but then having a looser model (with everything being optional) could be great. It would also cover Lou’s scenario (if I have understood his concern correctly) where most things are in the main TEI document header, and only the additional specificities are stated in the standOffHeader. Cheerio, Laurent

Best Peter

...

Am 31.05.2015 um 01:58 schrieb Laurent Romary :

Dear all, I am really pleased that you managed to put this effort on this. The discussion on Friday showed that this is a conceptual move that the council had to make it its own thing (“s’approprier” in French).

...

Le 30 mai 2015 à 23:20, Peter Stadler a écrit :

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

Indeed. We need to wait until we have an appropriate concept for this. I see Andreas this week and we’ll wrap on this.

...

* renamed annotationGrp —> listAnnotation

I’ll tell Thomas ASAP so that he can have the named changed on the current ISO proposal. Does the semantics ofxxxGrp reflects that there are heterogeneous content objects there? (typically components of the triptych target-annotation-body in OA)

...

* renamed model.annotationPart —> model.annotation

I wasn’t happy with the xxxPart here. Sounds good!

...

* got rid of dash in module name

I don’t really care :-} (reminds me of a song by Elton John on the “Single Man” album

...

* removed class att.confidence in favor of https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/561/

I am looking forward to have this feature implemented.

...

* added some more elements to model.annotation

In any case this “module” is likely to be customized when used. It’s really open. So why not.

...

* removed standOffHeader in favor of teiHeader(!!)

Interesting… (not in the British sense). Let’s move ahead with this.

...

We did not update the examples yet.

That’s easy to do and I can contribute if there is a consensus on the above decisions.

...

I’m curious about Laurent’s reaction and will probably have a conf call in the next week with him (— Laurent?!)

Kudos to the council. How much of this can I take for stable in current implementations? Best wishes to all, Laurent

...

Best Peter

Laurent Romary INRIA laurent.romary@inria.fr

Laurent Romary INRIA laurent.romary@inria.fr