Re: [tei-council] Please take a look at this bug

I'm in favour of the proposed change: it seems entirely reasonable that a single <constraint> might need to be expressed as more than one sch:rule. What I have never really understood is why we don't allow multiple <constraint>s within a single <constraintSpec>. But that is not the point at issue here. On 22/01/15 17:01, Martin Holmes wrote:

Hi Raff,

On 15-01-22 08:56 AM, Raffaele Viglianti wrote:

...

Hi Martin,

I am used to writing one rule per constraint and one constraint per constraintSpec -- possibly this is a result of the limitations caused by this bug. If we switch to the proposed model, it would allow multiple rules per constraint. Would that break anything? My feeling is that it wouldn't, but what do others think?

It shouldn't break anything, because we use it in the Guidelines itself:

http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/P5/Source/Specs/f.xml

We've given ourselves permission to do it, but denied it to everyone else. :-)

Cheers, Martin

...

Raff

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Martin Holmes wrote:

...

Hi all,

Could I ask Council to take a look at this bug?

http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/704/

I believe the explanation in the final comment is correct, that it's a corrigible error, and that it's fairly egregious (we give an example in the Guidelines of something that isn't actually permitted in standard TEI schemas; we get round this ourselves in the actual Guidelines source by customizing our ODD schemas). I'd like the OK to fix this; I think it should be release-blocking, and it's holding up the work Ron is doing to integrate the JTEI schema into our system.

If there are no objections in the next week, I'll assume assent and implement the fix suggested on the ticket.

Cheers, Martin -- 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