Re: [tei-council] readme for release 3.1.0 tomorrow

15 Dec 2016

      Morning,

In answer to Syd's questions (which I'm just seeing now),
1) Not all, I think what Hugh did is fine.
2) I think you'll live with it but we could change the prose.
3) Naw, they are talking about elements in the abstract, across 
releases.  (Ok, your next question then is how we would comment 
that we've removed a particular element... point to the previous 
release?)

I'm going to now give the release notes a read through and see if 
there is anything else that needs adding.

-James

On 15/12/16 09:32, Lou Burnard wrote:
...
The only time that anyone is likely to read the release notes 
is shortly after the release, so having the links go to the 
current release seems plausible.
It might possibly be confusing in the future, if someone wanted 
to see what had changed in what will then be a previous 
release. Such folks if they exist will no doubt be able to sort 
that confusion for themselves. Personally, I am surprised to 
see the links there at all: when Guidelines prose gets 
processed elsewhere the <gi>s are automagically converted to 
links anyway.
On 15/12/16 03:10, Mylonas, Elli wrote:
...
I thought the links were from the main element affected by the 
changes, and
other elements didn't get <gi>. i
[Elli Mylonas
  Senior Digital Humanities Librarian
  and
  Center for Digital Scholarship
  University Library
  Brown University
  library.brown.edu/cds]
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:59 PM, Hugh Cayless 
 wrote:
...
I didn't link all of them, but tried to link each one at 
least once. If
you're really uncomfortable, you could rewrite the sentence 
to point to
att.global.source instead. I don't think I'm terribly 
bothered by it. I
wasn't sure about pointing at the specific release, so I 
didn't. I worry
slightly about people looking at the release notes and going 
from there to
a frozen version of the GLs without realizing it. On the 
other hand, there
is the chance the links will be invalidated at some point in 
the future. I
dunno.
Sent from my phone.
...
On Dec 14, 2016, at 21:21, Syd Bauman 
 wrote:
Someone clever added links from the readme-3.1.0.xml file to 
the
Guidelines by surrounding various <gi>, <ident>, and an 
<att> with
<ref>.
1) Should *all* <gi> and <ident> be made into links? (There 
are a
    half dozen or so that are not links. I haven't looked at 
'em
    carefully, maybe they shouldn't be. Happy to look and 
fix, if
    that's the goal.)
2) I am slightly uncomfortable with the link from 
<att>source</att>
    to the Guidelines, as the link points to the tagdoc for 
a class.
    Since the tagdoc defines only 1 thing, the attribute 
@source, I'm
    not very uncomfortable. :-)
3) Most importantly, shouldn't the links be to the specific 
release
    we are talking about? E.g.,
http://www.tei-c.org/Vault/P5/3.1.0/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/
ref-actor.html
-- 
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
-- 
Dr James Cummings, James.Cummings@it.ox.ac.uk Academic IT 
Services, University of Oxford