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.
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
Sorry, meant to vote: 2 1 3 4 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
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 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-----
My personal preferences are 3,2,4,1 but maybe Martin is right, we could delay some days the release and discuss better the @scope issue (even if I'd rather examine it f2f). f 2015-10-07 18:49 GMT+02:00 Martin Holmes <mholmes@uvic.ca>:
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
-- 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
-- Fabio Ciotti Dipartimento di Studi letterari, Filosofici e Storia dell’arte Università di Roma Tor Vergata President "Associazione Informatica Umanistica Cultura Digitale" (AIUCD)
I forgot to say that if there's no example discussed in the Guidelines then this tag shouldn't be in the release. But I thought there were a few pretty good examples in the reference section which could easily be moved? 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
Sounds like #2 is the winner. I’m going to change @scope to data.word and add a description for it. I’m also going to insert one of the examples into the Guidelines. If some of you can take a look at it in the morning, we’ll see if it passes muster and decide whether to proceed with the release this week.
On Oct 7, 2015, at 10:26 , Hugh Cayless <philomousos@gmail.com> wrote:
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.
My vote: 1, 4, 3, 2 I think (2) and (3) are both shooting ourselves in the foot. I'm perfectly happy to release w/o <xenoData> or to delay release. (And yes, while I don't think it is a big release-blocking deal, Lou is right, one or two of those examples should be moved to the prose.)
For the record, I'd go for 2. We can add a suggested value list later with values we agree.
From holiday, James
-- Dr James Cummings, Academic IT, University of Oxford -----Original Message----- From: Hugh Cayless [philomousos@gmail.com] Received: Wednesday, 07 Oct 2015, 21:28 To: TEI Council [tei-council@lists.tei-c.org] Subject: Re: [tei-council] Decision time for xenodata/@scope Sounds like #2 is the winner. I’m going to change @scope to data.word and add a description for it. I’m also going to insert one of the examples into the Guidelines. If some of you can take a look at it in the morning, we’ll see if it passes muster and decide whether to proceed with the release this week.
On Oct 7, 2015, at 10:26 , Hugh Cayless <philomousos@gmail.com> wrote:
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
participants (7)
-
Fabio Ciotti -
Hugh Cayless -
James Cummings -
Lou Burnard -
Martin Holmes -
Peter Stadler -
Syd Bauman