Re: [tei-council] Enrich: (was Re: they come to bite us: biblScope/@type fallout

I don't understand what you mean James. I am thinking that there are very likely to be devious pathways through e.g. Manuscriptorium which expect to find @type used in the way our dogma now says you should use @unit. I see no reason to risk confusing such software. Deprecation is all very well, but it's no reason to break Birnbaum! On 20/12/14 20:37, James Cummings wrote:

I don't think us changing @type to @unit will cause any of the software you are thinking about to break (a they are unlikely to be generating new schemas)

I suggest changing it.

There are live projects and libraries using it, including a collaboration between Bodley and CUL spec coll developing a modified version of it as we speak for their medieval MSS. But this is the effect if deprecation.

James

-- Dr James Cummings, (from phone) james.cummings@it.ox.ac.uk IT Services, University of Oxford.

-----Original Message----- From: Lou Burnard [lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk] Received: Saturday, 20 Dec 2014, 19:50 To: tei-council@lists.tei-c.org [tei-council@lists.tei-c.org] Subject: [tei-council] Enrich: (was Re: they come to bite us: biblScope/@type fallout

I'm not sure I agree with that. There is quite a lot of data out there in the real world using Enrich and we wont win any friends by breaking it all for no good reason. I think it would be better to add @type as an explicit locally-defined attribute in the enrich ODD.

There is also, I suspect, software which we really don't want to force people to modify., especially since we are no longer in touch with its developers.

On 19/12/14 12:55, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:

...

...

On 19 Dec 2014, at 12:50, Martin Holmes wrote:

Hi all,

Following the removal of biblScope/@type, P5-Test and P5-Documentation built OK, but the main build failed because of the ENRICH schema, which I know nothing about. I guess we have two options: customize the ENRICH schema to add back @type on <biblScope>, or modify ENRICH so that it uses @unit instead.

Since ENRICH seems to be an interchange format, the former seems the better option, so I'll proceed on that basis; if you know differently, please shout. It looks like Lou was heavily involved in ENRICH:

http://projects.oucs.ox.ac.uk/ENRICH/Deliverables/referenceManual_en.html

If the project is still very active, and has some method of discussing and propagating change, we could suggest that they incorporate this change into their schema through whatever mechanisms they usually use. Lou, James and I all worked on ENRICH. No, it doesn’t have an active group any more.

I’d be inclined to the "modify ENRICH so that it uses @unit instead” method, as I don’t want ENRICH to be something other than a subset of TEI. but I’d like to hear what James and Lou think before you do anything. -- Sebastian Rahtz Director (Research) of Academic IT University of Oxford IT Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431

Não sou nada. Nunca serei nada. Não posso querer ser nada. À parte isso, tenho em mim todos os sonhos do mundo.

-- 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