Re: [tei-council] processing the processing model

Probably best just to try it. I have rather vague idea how to go about it*, but perhaps this is a good occasion to learn. Only afraid I may not have too much time during the week again. [*] meaning I don't have any except to try and dig in the guidelines :-) On 7 February 2016 at 20:05, Lou Burnard wrote:

It would be much easier if the names of parameters were global, i.e. if <param name="foo"> always had the same meaning no matter what behaviour it was associated with. Then we could define this list as a <valList> inside the spec for param/@name.

On 07/02/16 19:57, Magdalena Turska wrote:

...

Right, this is underspecified atm. We need list of expected params and their types for every behaviour; in cases where params invoke some special magic embedded in the function (as is the case eg with place on note behaviour), a list of available values.

On 7 February 2016 at 19:50, Lou Burnard wrote:

On 07/02/16 19:30, Magdalena Turska wrote:

...

In your testprocmod.odd there are 3 issues:

...

- one more or less your fault: link behaviour expects link param, not uri

Yes. This one is part of my general failure to understand how parameters work : I assume if I see an attribute @name="xxxx" that I can use whatever value I like. If not, shouldn't there be a <valList> somewhere with documented valItems?

Is it the TEI that decides what these @name values (or some of them) should be, and what they mean, or is it just something in your stylesheets? If the latter, obviously another procmod processor might expect different names.

-- 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