In the unlikely event that anyone still does, I have written a brief squib entitled "What is TEI conformance, and why should you care?" Constructive comments ate welcome: readable text is at https://lb42.github.io/W/conformance.html This is destined for presentation at a workshop in Heidelberg later this week, but it's not too late for you to make it better!
Hi Lou-- I care about TEI conformance, and I had a few minutes this morning that I didn't want to spend packing for an imminent trip, so I've read your squib with interest. I've heard you talk about this sort of thing before, so it's familiar, but I *do* have suggestions generally to improve it or use it as a basis for Something More that perhaps might be shared widely with the TEI community in written form. 1) CONTENT: Can you show us an example or two from real life to show the benefit making TEI conformant decisions? I say this because at the TEI in Vienna, one of the plenary speakers (Tara Andrews) seemed to think no one wrote TEI with interoperability in mind. Yet we know there ARE examples of major projects that are designed to share a common encoding, in order to share a publishing system and build a shared information architecture. Two examples I can think of are Georg Vogeler and the DTA, and Jeffrey Witt's SCTA project to establish shared archive for medievalists: see http://scta.info I think it's important for members of the TEI community to see what we can do when we make a priority of coding for interchange-ability. 2) STYLE: This squib has the familiar sound of Lou Burnard, which stylometric analysis might locate in its distinctive use of idiomatic expressions, such as "don't shoot the messenger" (I've never *quite* understood that one, though I *think* I get it). There are vivid uses of words like "cornucopia" to describe plentiful variety, and other such..."hard wired", "tesselate", etc. I'm not sure whether "tesselate" in the way you're using it to suggest element nesting actually means that in real life--when I go to look it up, I see it used to describe breaking up polygon shapes in tiling, and there's a tesselate element in KML. As your friendly neighborhood English professor and erstwhile instructor of technical writing, I suggest editing a bit to rely less on your audience's knowledge of your native idiom. (And seriously, can we rethink "don't shoot the messenger"?) I also realize this is probably about the most annoying comment I could give because it targets the very vividness of your prose. Anyway, to native speakers of English such idiom is more or less readily accessible, but our community is international (as is your Heidelberg presentation), and it seems to me we're all working on reducing ambiguities and clarifying the prose of the Guidelines pretty intensively lately. What you're delivering is really important, and really ought to be communicated as widely as it can. Hope this helps! Elisa On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
In the unlikely event that anyone still does, I have written a brief squib entitled "What is TEI conformance, and why should you care?"
Constructive comments ate welcome: readable text is at https://lb42.github.io/W/conformance.html
This is destined for presentation at a workshop in Heidelberg later this week, but it's not too late for you to make it better!
-- 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
-- Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD Director, Center for the Digital Text | Associate Professor of English University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg | Humanities Division 150 Finoli Drive Greensburg, PA 15601 USA E-mail: ebb8@pitt.edu <ebb8@pitt.edu> Development site: http://newtfire.org
I think Elisa is spot-on. "Tesselate" is entirely correct (tiles don't overlap), but it's also highly technical. "Don't shoot the messenger" does have an odd aspect to it, particularly as applied to EpiDoc. I'm guessing it's meant to be a little funny, and to be a bit of a strawman for your argument that one should learn to customize one's TEI as needed. I agree with the thrust of that argument, but the joke falls flat for me. EpiDoc is meant to be a very specific tool, created for a small community of practice that has followed a pretty consistent set of editorial conventions for decades. It may not work for you outside those parameters, though people are sometimes tempted by it, I think because of its attention to the materiality of texts, which other types of edition certainly care about. EpiDoc is a Torx driver, if you will. So it's great if you have Torx screws, but not so much if they're Phillips screws, and worse if you have nails. "We don't do windows" perhaps? Or "fit for purpose"? On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Elisa Beshero-Bondar <ebb8@pitt.edu> wrote:
Hi Lou-- I care about TEI conformance, and I had a few minutes this morning that I didn't want to spend packing for an imminent trip, so I've read your squib with interest. I've heard you talk about this sort of thing before, so it's familiar, but I *do* have suggestions generally to improve it or use it as a basis for Something More that perhaps might be shared widely with the TEI community in written form.
1) CONTENT: Can you show us an example or two from real life to show the benefit making TEI conformant decisions? I say this because at the TEI in Vienna, one of the plenary speakers (Tara Andrews) seemed to think no one wrote TEI with interoperability in mind. Yet we know there ARE examples of major projects that are designed to share a common encoding, in order to share a publishing system and build a shared information architecture. Two examples I can think of are Georg Vogeler and the DTA, and Jeffrey Witt's SCTA project to establish shared archive for medievalists: see http://scta.info I think it's important for members of the TEI community to see what we can do when we make a priority of coding for interchange-ability.
2) STYLE: This squib has the familiar sound of Lou Burnard, which stylometric analysis might locate in its distinctive use of idiomatic expressions, such as "don't shoot the messenger" (I've never *quite* understood that one, though I *think* I get it). There are vivid uses of words like "cornucopia" to describe plentiful variety, and other such..."hard wired", "tesselate", etc. I'm not sure whether "tesselate" in the way you're using it to suggest element nesting actually means that in real life--when I go to look it up, I see it used to describe breaking up polygon shapes in tiling, and there's a tesselate element in KML. As your friendly neighborhood English professor and erstwhile instructor of technical writing, I suggest editing a bit to rely less on your audience's knowledge of your native idiom. (And seriously, can we rethink "don't shoot the messenger"?) I also realize this is probably about the most annoying comment I could give because it targets the very vividness of your prose.
Anyway, to native speakers of English such idiom is more or less readily accessible, but our community is international (as is your Heidelberg presentation), and it seems to me we're all working on reducing ambiguities and clarifying the prose of the Guidelines pretty intensively lately. What you're delivering is really important, and really ought to be communicated as widely as it can.
Hope this helps! Elisa
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk
wrote:
In the unlikely event that anyone still does, I have written a brief squib entitled "What is TEI conformance, and why should you care?"
Constructive comments ate welcome: readable text is at https://lb42.github.io/W/conformance.html
This is destined for presentation at a workshop in Heidelberg later this week, but it's not too late for you to make it better!
-- 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
-- Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD Director, Center for the Digital Text | Associate Professor of English University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg | Humanities Division 150 Finoli Drive Greensburg, PA 15601 USA E-mail: ebb8@pitt.edu <ebb8@pitt.edu> Development site: http://newtfire.org -- 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
Thanks Hugh and Elisa: I've got rid of the messenger, and had a crack at removing "tesselate" though it's hard to do it completely. I'm delighted to infer that the absence of any non-stylistic issues implies that we are all of one mind on its actual propositional content.... p.s. wtf is a torx driver? On 10/05/17 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote:
I think Elisa is spot-on. "Tesselate" is entirely correct (tiles don't overlap), but it's also highly technical.
"Don't shoot the messenger" does have an odd aspect to it, particularly as applied to EpiDoc. I'm guessing it's meant to be a little funny, and to be a bit of a strawman for your argument that one should learn to customize one's TEI as needed. I agree with the thrust of that argument, but the joke falls flat for me. EpiDoc is meant to be a very specific tool, created for a small community of practice that has followed a pretty consistent set of editorial conventions for decades. It may not work for you outside those parameters, though people are sometimes tempted by it, I think because of its attention to the materiality of texts, which other types of edition certainly care about.
EpiDoc is a Torx driver, if you will. So it's great if you have Torx screws, but not so much if they're Phillips screws, and worse if you have nails.
"We don't do windows" perhaps? Or "fit for purpose"?
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Elisa Beshero-Bondar <ebb8@pitt.edu> wrote:
Hi Lou-- I care about TEI conformance, and I had a few minutes this morning that I didn't want to spend packing for an imminent trip, so I've read your squib with interest. I've heard you talk about this sort of thing before, so it's familiar, but I *do* have suggestions generally to improve it or use it as a basis for Something More that perhaps might be shared widely with the TEI community in written form.
1) CONTENT: Can you show us an example or two from real life to show the benefit making TEI conformant decisions? I say this because at the TEI in Vienna, one of the plenary speakers (Tara Andrews) seemed to think no one wrote TEI with interoperability in mind. Yet we know there ARE examples of major projects that are designed to share a common encoding, in order to share a publishing system and build a shared information architecture. Two examples I can think of are Georg Vogeler and the DTA, and Jeffrey Witt's SCTA project to establish shared archive for medievalists: see http://scta.info I think it's important for members of the TEI community to see what we can do when we make a priority of coding for interchange-ability.
2) STYLE: This squib has the familiar sound of Lou Burnard, which stylometric analysis might locate in its distinctive use of idiomatic expressions, such as "don't shoot the messenger" (I've never *quite* understood that one, though I *think* I get it). There are vivid uses of words like "cornucopia" to describe plentiful variety, and other such..."hard wired", "tesselate", etc. I'm not sure whether "tesselate" in the way you're using it to suggest element nesting actually means that in real life--when I go to look it up, I see it used to describe breaking up polygon shapes in tiling, and there's a tesselate element in KML. As your friendly neighborhood English professor and erstwhile instructor of technical writing, I suggest editing a bit to rely less on your audience's knowledge of your native idiom. (And seriously, can we rethink "don't shoot the messenger"?) I also realize this is probably about the most annoying comment I could give because it targets the very vividness of your prose.
Anyway, to native speakers of English such idiom is more or less readily accessible, but our community is international (as is your Heidelberg presentation), and it seems to me we're all working on reducing ambiguities and clarifying the prose of the Guidelines pretty intensively lately. What you're delivering is really important, and really ought to be communicated as widely as it can.
Hope this helps! Elisa
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk wrote:
In the unlikely event that anyone still does, I have written a brief squib entitled "What is TEI conformance, and why should you care?"
Constructive comments ate welcome: readable text is at https://lb42.github.io/W/conformance.html
This is destined for presentation at a workshop in Heidelberg later this week, but it's not too late for you to make it better!
-- 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
-- Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD Director, Center for the Digital Text | Associate Professor of English University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg | Humanities Division 150 Finoli Drive Greensburg, PA 15601 USA E-mail: ebb8@pitt.edu <ebb8@pitt.edu> Development site: http://newtfire.org -- 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
Lou and all— Now, wait a minute: I *did* have a content suggestion: What adding talk of some examples: some serious Real Projects (like Jeff Witt’s and Georg Vogeler’s or others that make sense here) that actively work on conformance and interoperability? I think these would be good to know about and worth a shout-out for context. After all that, I kind of liked Hugh’s explanation of “tesselated”—but I wouldn’t use it here without the explanation of tiling. “Fit for purpose” seems more appropos than visualizing terrified messengers who don’t want to be shot. ;-) Elisa
On May 10, 2017, at 2:18 PM, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
Thanks Hugh and Elisa: I've got rid of the messenger, and had a crack at removing "tesselate" though it's hard to do it completely.
I'm delighted to infer that the absence of any non-stylistic issues implies that we are all of one mind on its actual propositional content....
p.s. wtf is a torx driver?
On 10/05/17 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote:
I think Elisa is spot-on. "Tesselate" is entirely correct (tiles don't overlap), but it's also highly technical.
"Don't shoot the messenger" does have an odd aspect to it, particularly as applied to EpiDoc. I'm guessing it's meant to be a little funny, and to be a bit of a strawman for your argument that one should learn to customize one's TEI as needed. I agree with the thrust of that argument, but the joke falls flat for me. EpiDoc is meant to be a very specific tool, created for a small community of practice that has followed a pretty consistent set of editorial conventions for decades. It may not work for you outside those parameters, though people are sometimes tempted by it, I think because of its attention to the materiality of texts, which other types of edition certainly care about.
EpiDoc is a Torx driver, if you will. So it's great if you have Torx screws, but not so much if they're Phillips screws, and worse if you have nails.
"We don't do windows" perhaps? Or "fit for purpose"?
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Elisa Beshero-Bondar <ebb8@pitt.edu> wrote:
Hi Lou-- I care about TEI conformance, and I had a few minutes this morning that I didn't want to spend packing for an imminent trip, so I've read your squib with interest. I've heard you talk about this sort of thing before, so it's familiar, but I *do* have suggestions generally to improve it or use it as a basis for Something More that perhaps might be shared widely with the TEI community in written form.
1) CONTENT: Can you show us an example or two from real life to show the benefit making TEI conformant decisions? I say this because at the TEI in Vienna, one of the plenary speakers (Tara Andrews) seemed to think no one wrote TEI with interoperability in mind. Yet we know there ARE examples of major projects that are designed to share a common encoding, in order to share a publishing system and build a shared information architecture. Two examples I can think of are Georg Vogeler and the DTA, and Jeffrey Witt's SCTA project to establish shared archive for medievalists: see http://scta.info I think it's important for members of the TEI community to see what we can do when we make a priority of coding for interchange-ability.
2) STYLE: This squib has the familiar sound of Lou Burnard, which stylometric analysis might locate in its distinctive use of idiomatic expressions, such as "don't shoot the messenger" (I've never *quite* understood that one, though I *think* I get it). There are vivid uses of words like "cornucopia" to describe plentiful variety, and other such..."hard wired", "tesselate", etc. I'm not sure whether "tesselate" in the way you're using it to suggest element nesting actually means that in real life--when I go to look it up, I see it used to describe breaking up polygon shapes in tiling, and there's a tesselate element in KML. As your friendly neighborhood English professor and erstwhile instructor of technical writing, I suggest editing a bit to rely less on your audience's knowledge of your native idiom. (And seriously, can we rethink "don't shoot the messenger"?) I also realize this is probably about the most annoying comment I could give because it targets the very vividness of your prose.
Anyway, to native speakers of English such idiom is more or less readily accessible, but our community is international (as is your Heidelberg presentation), and it seems to me we're all working on reducing ambiguities and clarifying the prose of the Guidelines pretty intensively lately. What you're delivering is really important, and really ought to be communicated as widely as it can.
Hope this helps! Elisa
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk wrote:
In the unlikely event that anyone still does, I have written a brief squib entitled "What is TEI conformance, and why should you care?"
Constructive comments ate welcome: readable text is at https://lb42.github.io/W/conformance.html
This is destined for presentation at a workshop in Heidelberg later this week, but it's not too late for you to make it better!
-- 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
-- Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD Director, Center for the Digital Text | Associate Professor of English University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg | Humanities Division 150 Finoli Drive Greensburg, PA 15601 USA E-mail: ebb8@pitt.edu <ebb8@pitt.edu> Development site: http://newtfire.org -- 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
Indeed you did Elisa, and I entirely agree with it. I just haven't done it yet. I've also only just seen Syd's very cogent and detailed response which contains some helpful suggestions for bits to cut and just a few meaty issues we may need to argue about (I don't see stuff posted to the council list unless i go looking for it) On 10/05/17 19:24, Elisa Beshero-Bondar wrote:
Lou and all— Now, wait a minute: I *did* have a content suggestion: What adding talk of some examples: some serious Real Projects (like Jeff Witt’s and Georg Vogeler’s or others that make sense here) that actively work on conformance and interoperability? I think these would be good to know about and worth a shout-out for context.
After all that, I kind of liked Hugh’s explanation of “tesselated”—but I wouldn’t use it here without the explanation of tiling. “Fit for purpose” seems more appropos than visualizing terrified messengers who don’t want to be shot. ;-)
Elisa
On May 10, 2017, at 2:18 PM, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
Thanks Hugh and Elisa: I've got rid of the messenger, and had a crack at removing "tesselate" though it's hard to do it completely.
I'm delighted to infer that the absence of any non-stylistic issues implies that we are all of one mind on its actual propositional content....
p.s. wtf is a torx driver?
On 10/05/17 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote:
I think Elisa is spot-on. "Tesselate" is entirely correct (tiles don't overlap), but it's also highly technical.
"Don't shoot the messenger" does have an odd aspect to it, particularly as applied to EpiDoc. I'm guessing it's meant to be a little funny, and to be a bit of a strawman for your argument that one should learn to customize one's TEI as needed. I agree with the thrust of that argument, but the joke falls flat for me. EpiDoc is meant to be a very specific tool, created for a small community of practice that has followed a pretty consistent set of editorial conventions for decades. It may not work for you outside those parameters, though people are sometimes tempted by it, I think because of its attention to the materiality of texts, which other types of edition certainly care about.
EpiDoc is a Torx driver, if you will. So it's great if you have Torx screws, but not so much if they're Phillips screws, and worse if you have nails.
"We don't do windows" perhaps? Or "fit for purpose"?
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Elisa Beshero-Bondar <ebb8@pitt.edu> wrote:
Hi Lou-- I care about TEI conformance, and I had a few minutes this morning that I didn't want to spend packing for an imminent trip, so I've read your squib with interest. I've heard you talk about this sort of thing before, so it's familiar, but I *do* have suggestions generally to improve it or use it as a basis for Something More that perhaps might be shared widely with the TEI community in written form.
1) CONTENT: Can you show us an example or two from real life to show the benefit making TEI conformant decisions? I say this because at the TEI in Vienna, one of the plenary speakers (Tara Andrews) seemed to think no one wrote TEI with interoperability in mind. Yet we know there ARE examples of major projects that are designed to share a common encoding, in order to share a publishing system and build a shared information architecture. Two examples I can think of are Georg Vogeler and the DTA, and Jeffrey Witt's SCTA project to establish shared archive for medievalists: see http://scta.info I think it's important for members of the TEI community to see what we can do when we make a priority of coding for interchange-ability.
2) STYLE: This squib has the familiar sound of Lou Burnard, which stylometric analysis might locate in its distinctive use of idiomatic expressions, such as "don't shoot the messenger" (I've never *quite* understood that one, though I *think* I get it). There are vivid uses of words like "cornucopia" to describe plentiful variety, and other such..."hard wired", "tesselate", etc. I'm not sure whether "tesselate" in the way you're using it to suggest element nesting actually means that in real life--when I go to look it up, I see it used to describe breaking up polygon shapes in tiling, and there's a tesselate element in KML. As your friendly neighborhood English professor and erstwhile instructor of technical writing, I suggest editing a bit to rely less on your audience's knowledge of your native idiom. (And seriously, can we rethink "don't shoot the messenger"?) I also realize this is probably about the most annoying comment I could give because it targets the very vividness of your prose.
Anyway, to native speakers of English such idiom is more or less readily accessible, but our community is international (as is your Heidelberg presentation), and it seems to me we're all working on reducing ambiguities and clarifying the prose of the Guidelines pretty intensively lately. What you're delivering is really important, and really ought to be communicated as widely as it can.
Hope this helps! Elisa
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk wrote:
In the unlikely event that anyone still does, I have written a brief squib entitled "What is TEI conformance, and why should you care?"
Constructive comments ate welcome: readable text is at https://lb42.github.io/W/conformance.html
This is destined for presentation at a workshop in Heidelberg later this week, but it's not too late for you to make it better!
-- 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
-- Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD Director, Center for the Digital Text | Associate Professor of English University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg | Humanities Division 150 Finoli Drive Greensburg, PA 15601 USA E-mail: ebb8@pitt.edu <ebb8@pitt.edu> Development site: http://newtfire.org -- 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
The screws with the star-shaped heads. Common in electronics but not woodworking. Sent from my phone.
On May 10, 2017, at 14:18, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
Thanks Hugh and Elisa: I've got rid of the messenger, and had a crack at removing "tesselate" though it's hard to do it completely.
I'm delighted to infer that the absence of any non-stylistic issues implies that we are all of one mind on its actual propositional content....
p.s. wtf is a torx driver?
On 10/05/17 15:32, Hugh Cayless wrote: I think Elisa is spot-on. "Tesselate" is entirely correct (tiles don't overlap), but it's also highly technical.
"Don't shoot the messenger" does have an odd aspect to it, particularly as applied to EpiDoc. I'm guessing it's meant to be a little funny, and to be a bit of a strawman for your argument that one should learn to customize one's TEI as needed. I agree with the thrust of that argument, but the joke falls flat for me. EpiDoc is meant to be a very specific tool, created for a small community of practice that has followed a pretty consistent set of editorial conventions for decades. It may not work for you outside those parameters, though people are sometimes tempted by it, I think because of its attention to the materiality of texts, which other types of edition certainly care about.
EpiDoc is a Torx driver, if you will. So it's great if you have Torx screws, but not so much if they're Phillips screws, and worse if you have nails.
"We don't do windows" perhaps? Or "fit for purpose"?
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Elisa Beshero-Bondar <ebb8@pitt.edu> wrote:
Hi Lou-- I care about TEI conformance, and I had a few minutes this morning that I didn't want to spend packing for an imminent trip, so I've read your squib with interest. I've heard you talk about this sort of thing before, so it's familiar, but I *do* have suggestions generally to improve it or use it as a basis for Something More that perhaps might be shared widely with the TEI community in written form.
1) CONTENT: Can you show us an example or two from real life to show the benefit making TEI conformant decisions? I say this because at the TEI in Vienna, one of the plenary speakers (Tara Andrews) seemed to think no one wrote TEI with interoperability in mind. Yet we know there ARE examples of major projects that are designed to share a common encoding, in order to share a publishing system and build a shared information architecture. Two examples I can think of are Georg Vogeler and the DTA, and Jeffrey Witt's SCTA project to establish shared archive for medievalists: see http://scta.info I think it's important for members of the TEI community to see what we can do when we make a priority of coding for interchange-ability.
2) STYLE: This squib has the familiar sound of Lou Burnard, which stylometric analysis might locate in its distinctive use of idiomatic expressions, such as "don't shoot the messenger" (I've never *quite* understood that one, though I *think* I get it). There are vivid uses of words like "cornucopia" to describe plentiful variety, and other such..."hard wired", "tesselate", etc. I'm not sure whether "tesselate" in the way you're using it to suggest element nesting actually means that in real life--when I go to look it up, I see it used to describe breaking up polygon shapes in tiling, and there's a tesselate element in KML. As your friendly neighborhood English professor and erstwhile instructor of technical writing, I suggest editing a bit to rely less on your audience's knowledge of your native idiom. (And seriously, can we rethink "don't shoot the messenger"?) I also realize this is probably about the most annoying comment I could give because it targets the very vividness of your prose.
Anyway, to native speakers of English such idiom is more or less readily accessible, but our community is international (as is your Heidelberg presentation), and it seems to me we're all working on reducing ambiguities and clarifying the prose of the Guidelines pretty intensively lately. What you're delivering is really important, and really ought to be communicated as widely as it can.
Hope this helps! Elisa
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk wrote:
In the unlikely event that anyone still does, I have written a brief squib entitled "What is TEI conformance, and why should you care?"
Constructive comments ate welcome: readable text is at https://lb42.github.io/W/conformance.html
This is destined for presentation at a workshop in Heidelberg later this week, but it's not too late for you to make it better!
-- 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
-- Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD Director, Center for the Digital Text | Associate Professor of English University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg | Humanities Division 150 Finoli Drive Greensburg, PA 15601 USA E-mail: ebb8@pitt.edu <ebb8@pitt.edu> Development site: http://newtfire.org -- 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
As he who brought the word "tesselate" to the TEI, I can assure you Lou is using it exactly as intended. I would have hoped (completely incorrectly, apparently) that it no longer needed glossing. Sigh. My only concern, Lou, is that you are inconsistent between the British spelling "tessellate" and the more American spelling "tesselate".
Syd— I am sorry to disappoint you by not immediately understanding the word “tesselate” in TEI context, but I find that abstruse word choice, however much one admires it, requires a good gloss to give it a chance at, er, sustainability in the long range. —Elisa -- Elisa Beshero-Bondar, PhD Director, Center for the Digital Text | Associate Professor of English University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg | Humanities Division 150 Finoli Drive Greensburg, PA 15601 USA E-mail: ebb8@pitt.edu <mailto:ebb8@pitt.edu> Development site: http://newtfire.org <http://newtfire.org/>
On May 10, 2017, at 3:47 PM, Syd Bauman <s.bauman@northeastern.edu> wrote:
As he who brought the word "tesselate" to the TEI, I can assure you Lou is using it exactly as intended. I would have hoped (completely incorrectly, apparently) that it no longer needed glossing. Sigh.
My only concern, Lou, is that you are inconsistent between the British spelling "tessellate" and the more American spelling "tesselate". -- 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
Overall: excellent. I do not think this should be restricted to your workshop audiences. I very much hope you submit a version to the upcoming TEI conference. (I also hope that you explicit release it under some FLOS license or other, but given that it is already so by virtue of being on GitHub, it's not entirely necessary.) I can imagine this being required reading, e.g., in a DH certificate program. I would certainly use it as reading material in my modeling class (e.g., that James & I put on at DHSI last year). I had to look up what 'rugosities' means. :-) Nit-picks: * "RELAX NG" is spelled with a space. * Typo: "cuustomized" * Might be useful if the list of what a full TEI element specification contains were a labeled (<soCalled>ordered</>) list so that you could refer to "processing model" as "#7" or "g." or whatever. Issues: * I don't think the discussion of how TEI recently upgraded to Pure ODD is particularly germane. I realize it is important to the TEI, and to you, personally, but I don't think its discussion here adds a lot to the paper. I would relegate it to a footnote. * The idea that constraints are also expressed "in addition to the content model" (e.g., with @restriction or Schematron) is barely touched upon, but (IMHO) is important to the point at hand. * I think it worth noting that the criticism "that their focus on data independence leads to a focus on the platonic essence of the data model" is at other times considered an advantage, not a liability. Either way, like the discussion of Pure ODD, the discussion of the processing model is not directly relevant to conformance, especially since you are not arguing that to be conformant a TEI application must adhere to the processing suggested by <model>s. * "As noted above, a simple TEI customization can be made by selecting": Maybe I just missed it, but where was it noted above? * Why on earth do you say that "new elements should be included in existing content models by making them members of existing TEI classes for example, rather than by explicitly modifying the content model of an existing element"? It strikes me as completely untrue. If you intend your new <lb:blort> elements to occur inside <item>, and never anywhere else, I would argue it should be added directly to the content model of <item> and not to macro.specialPara. * I will argue that a publication statement or source description that is really "entirely vacuous" (i.e. is empty) does not meet the intent of TEI conformance. Perhaps "so vague as to be useless"? * "TEI Header element cannot ever be validated": While technically true, many people use the term "validated" slightly loosely to mean "attempted to validate against formal declaration" or some such. Those folks will be (mildly) confused. So it might be better to re-word to "cannot ever be considered valid" or "cannot be TEI conformant" or some such. * "following diagram": no diagram in the GitHub view of this document. * "For example, the TEI Guidelines require that a modification ... that ... TEI elements whose definition has been modified in such a way that instances of them would no longer be regarded as valid by tei_all, should not be defined within the TEI namespace". Really? I'm not sure that's true, but seems problematic if it is. I gotta go. I won't be back at a computer for hours ...
In the unlikely event that anyone still does, I have written a brief squib entitled "What is TEI conformance, and why should you care?" Constructive comments ate welcome: readable text is at https://lb42.github.io/W/conformance.html This is destined for presentation at a workshop in Heidelberg later this week, but it's not too late for you to make it better!
participants (5)
-
Elisa Beshero-Bondar -
Elisa Beshero-Bondar -
Hugh Cayless -
Lou Burnard -
Syd Bauman