Re: [tei-council] Pure ODD formatting (was Re: gittery)

Am I correct that this is (related to) http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/560/ ? Best Peter

Am 29.09.2015 um 13:26 schrieb Hugh Cayless :

Ah, I didn't realize you wanted the PureODD on a separate row. That's probably easier. I guess we should talk about what to do with the RelaxNG (and other schema flavors?) at the F2F.

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:13 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:

...

Good. As I said before, we should definitely be adding a row to the output table that shows the pure ODD view. It is probably easiest to clone that from the existing code that displays schematron rules (is that the "handle" you had in mind?) Whether we also retain the RelaxNG productions, or complete them with DTD and W3C schema, or whatever, is less clear to me. I'd be quite happy to see the RelaxNG disappear, but I anticipate a smallish outcry if it does.

Not sure what you mean by "interface work" here. There is a teeny bit of "interface" that enables the user to toggle between RNC and RNG views -- is that what you meant? But I think the pure ODD should be in a separate place, and not toggleable.

On 29/09/15 01:55, Hugh Cayless wrote:

...

I think I've got a handle on #1, but a bit of interface work will be needed so you can choose between Pure ODD and the two flavors of Relax.

Sent from my phone.

On Sep 28, 2015, at 17:31, Lou Burnard

...

wrote:

There are two issues, as I posted here a week or two ago. 1. We want to see the pure odd source for the content model not the relaxng declarations generated from it. 2. We want to see the datatype for an attribute as a pointer to the named dataspec. 3. We want to see the dataspecs. My fudged local Stylesheets fixes the last of these, but has a way to go on the others

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Tab®|PRO

-------- Original message -------- From: Hugh Cayless Date:09/28/2015 22:27 (GMT+00:00) To: tei-council@lists.tei-c.org Subject: Re: [tei-council] gittery

When I generate the HTML Guidelines, I see the RelaxNG content models. I thought there was an issue with that? Or is it just that we want to see the PureOdd instead (or in addition to)?

-- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council

PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived -- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council

PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived