-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 2,3,1,4 Cheers Peter Am 07.10.2015 um 18:49 schrieb Martin Holmes:
Also I'd like to add:
It bothers me a bit that one day before a release we're still discussing the inclusion of an attribute. I'd be inclined to put off the release until everybody is comfortable with what we're doing.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-10-07 09:17 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
My vote is 2 3 4 1
So far only a small minority of council members has expressed any opinion. If we can't get a consensus or at least a majority view I think we have a serious problem.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Tab®|PRO
-------- Original message -------- From: Hugh Cayless Date:10/07/2015 15:27 (GMT+00:00) To: TEI Council Subject: [tei-council] Decision time for xenodata/@scope
We seem to be at a bit of an impasse, and we're releasing tomorrow. At this point we can:
1) release xenodata as-is, with @scope and the current value list. 2) release xenodata with @scope, but without a list of recommended values 3) release xenodata without @scope 4) back out xenodata and release without it
My own preferences, in order, are 3, 2, 4, 1. I'm not convinced of the need for @scope, but I really think the value names have to be changed (and some removed) if we go with it.
Thoughts? In addition, I do think we need to provide an example or two in the text of the Guidelines. I can come up with a non-XML one pretty easily. -- 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
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWFWK7AAoJEJclm6G69Xq2UZMH/RqkiYMU4xaN5ruEw4uVrUgt JkYGoAgB7XEhHDNKExZo0Nd7TzvBnriYwxjsph7xMc6hXJB8kc+gCTOxD9hiE91A 5id6uBkLJBMHcukcPUxkON8mrJ5I7DTKcK5byzBLXYh9wJ0IorGi4jZ2kTTKMdyN Wu4dDPEsFrpL+QPxnodT0US2Sv+MsVXgE+hJLDLDLlC8BI7s1ROYg8VXRWjs+Ihn d/3cwwqlQ8eG954TuRfGYFrqX8IdhRFnHnH57PlDtVvRjazvD8VdK+Kf1+NJD1mR Mk8YrPNHN7qFSyLyON9o0yXCXSLk1OMxGjl6wGGMLJ1yYDPUd6OxpGeyhSeqWHI= =savM -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----