Just an extra bit of information: Piotr replied to my message in private because I sent him a direct reply when I meant to reply to him on TEI-L *sigh* Raff On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 2:11 PM Raffaele Viglianti < raffaeleviglianti@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear all,

I wanted to let you know that Piotr, in a personal reply to my earlier email, has provided some background about the current users of the standoff proposal and how that may or may not impact our decision. I don't want to share it here because this list's archives are open and he sent me a personal email, but his message warrants further discussion. Let me just say that they may be quite unable to accept anything but a <standOff> with a <teiHeader>, which I still think isn't a good idea.

The resistance to nested TEI seems fairly substantial to me. Even though there are only a few but loud voices, I think they are making enough sense to make me want to go back to the whiteboard. The thing is, that the only other scenario I can imagine will anger the standOff proposers all the same, but here it is.

If nested TEI is a no go and teiHeader in standoff is also a no go, then the only option I see for paired standOff and header is splitting it into multiple TEI files. Collections can be build with teiCorpus, which today I learned is loose enough to not map to what I think of a corpus.

<teiCorpus> <teiHeader> <!-- metadata about the collection --> </teiHeader>

<TEI> <teiHeader> <!-- metadata about the annotated text --> </teiHeader> <text> <!-- the text --> </text> </TEI>

<!-- annotation layers to follow -->

<TEI> <teiHeader> <!-- metadata about annotation layer 1 --> </teiHeader> <standOff> <!-- annotations --> </standOff> </TEI>

<TEI> <teiHeader> <!-- metadata about annotation layer 2 --> </teiHeader> <standOff> <!-- annotations --> </standOff> </TEI>

<!-- etc. --> </teiCorpus>

This requires no big changes and in my opinion gets them what they need, but unfortunately, because of insider knowledge, I know it won't be welcomed.

Let me know if you think this is worth sharing to TEI-L as a counter proposal. I ask because it concedes not changing teiCorpus, so I'd like to hear the council's opinion first.

This is going to be a tough nut to crack. Raff

On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 6:57 AM Scholger, Martina ( martina.scholger@uni-graz.at) wrote:

...

Dear James,

Since you are making a compelling argument, do you want to share this with the list?

Best,

Martina

*Von:* James Cummings *Gesendet:* Montag, 1. Juli 2019 11:53 *An:* Laurent Romary *Cc:* Scholger, Martina (martina.scholger@uni-graz.at) < martina.scholger@uni-graz.at>; TEI Council *Betreff:* Re: [Tei-council] feedback on teiCorpus

It occurs to me that 2b could also say "choosing to more strongly exemplify nesting TEI or not" (i.e. we could choose to not do anything about it, allow nesting, continue to exemplify TEICorpus, or move to exemplifying nesting TEI more) So 2b is really two possibilities. Poorly phrased on my part. ;-)

-James

Many thanks,

James

--

Dr James Cummings, James.Cummings@newcastle.ac.uk Senior Lecturer in Late-Medieval Literature and Digital Humanities

School of English, Newcastle University ------------------------------

*From:* Laurent Romary *Sent:* 01 July 2019 10:49 *To:* James Cummings *Cc:* Martina Scholger; TEI Council *Subject:* Re: [Tei-council] feedback on teiCorpus

Dear all,

I am in phase with James’s note below. We could clarify rapidly while leaving options open.

Laurent

Le 1 juil. 2019 à 11:45, James Cummings a écrit :

Hi Laurent, Martina, Council, etc.

In terms of responding on TEI-L, this should be done promptly, I think immediately. Someone should take pains to point out again the two different and quite separate issues at hand:

1) For the standoff proposal, not wanting teiHeader in places other than it usually appears has created the suggestion of nesting TEI elements. This may or may not be a good solution for those wanting the standoff element or other people.

2) If, and only if, the council implemented the ability to nest TEI elements, this sort of makes TEICorpus redundant. In that case we are considering the possibilities of a) a long deprecation of TEICorpus, or b) choosing to more strongly exemplify nesting TEI or c) not deprecating in any way. Some may feel we should have both ways of doing things, some that we should de-exemplify TEICorpus, and some that should not deprecate or de-exemplify it at all. It is really issue 2 that we are asking the community about.

Just my two pence,

Many thanks,

James

--

Dr James Cummings, James.Cummings@newcastle.ac.uk Senior Lecturer in Late-Medieval Literature and Digital Humanities

School of English, Newcastle University ------------------------------

*From:* Tei-council on behalf of Laurent Romary *Sent:* 01 July 2019 09:22 *To:* Martina Scholger *Cc:* TEI Council *Subject:* Re: [Tei-council] feedback on teiCorpus

Dear Martina,

I need to set my planning for the week, but I could set up Monday afternoon as a possible slot.

Best wishes,

Laurent

Le 1 juil. 2019 à 10:10, Scholger, Martina (martina.scholger@uni-graz.at) a écrit :

Dear Laurent,

The Council will meet from September 14 to 16 (Sat-Mon). Would it be possible for you to join the Council meeting for a half day / a couple of hours to discuss standoff and other ling issues?

Best,

Martina

*Von:* Laurent Romary *Gesendet:* Montag, 01. Juli 2019 07:39 *An:* Scholger, Martina (martina.scholger@uni-graz.at) < martina.scholger@uni-graz.at> *Cc:* TEI Council *Betreff:* Re: feedback on teiCorpus

Dear all,

The main point I see is that by linking the two issues, we have been weak in argumentent for any of them. The causal chain from [teiHeader should not be in stadOff] to [teiCorpus] must be dropped is tiny, and we need to see whether we should not deal with things more independently from one another (in whatever order). I had started to elaborate the stdOff case in the scenario document but truly the recursive TEI discussion took us most of our discussion time. This is subtle and mail is not necessarily the best channel. Would Graz be a good place for making progress f2f?

Best wishes,

Laurent

Le 30 juin 2019 à 23:31, Scholger, Martina (martina.scholger@uni-graz.at) a écrit :

Dear all,

There have been several replies and questions sparked by our email about nesting TEI, deprecating teiCorpus, and standoff.

One of the most prominent questions is that people want to know more about the standoff element. Is there a documentation that we can share with the list? Is this ( https://github.com/sydb/stdfSpec/tree/linkDataBlock/Specification) in a state to be shared?

The second major reaction was that several people ask for a reason why teiCorpus should be deprecated.

How do we want to proceed with this? I believe that we should address this soon.

Best,

Martina

*Von:* Tei-council *Im Auftrag von *Scholger, Martina (martina.scholger@uni-graz.at) *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 26. Juni 2019 23:32 *An:* Laurent Romary *Cc:* TEI Council *Betreff:* Re: [Tei-council] feedback on teiCorpus

Dear all,

thanks for your comments and suggestions.

If there are no objections until tomorrow at noon, I’ll send it to the list.

Best,

Martina

*Von:* Laurent Romary *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 25. Juni 2019 20:54 *An:* Scholger, Martina (martina.scholger@uni-graz.at) < martina.scholger@uni-graz.at> *Cc:* TEI Council *Betreff:* Re: feedback on teiCorpus

Cool! I have edited the footnote and commented on the deprecation time.

Best wishes and thanks for the lead on this,

Laurent

Le 24 juin 2019 à 19:04, Scholger, Martina (martina.scholger@uni-graz.at) a écrit :

Dear Laurent, dear Council,

As discussed, we want to send an email to the TEI-L announcing the introduction of nesting TEI elements and asking for feedback on the proposal to deprecate <teiCorpus>. I made a first draft for this email here ( https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jlk0FUHjUKlN-1-WAqhlhYReT2yq_eIbYP66oskx...) and ask you to chime in. I suggest to send this on Wednesday.

Best wishes,

Martina

Laurent Romary

Inria, team ALMAnaCH

laurent.romary@inria.fr

Laurent Romary

Inria, team ALMAnaCH

laurent.romary@inria.fr

Laurent Romary

Inria, team ALMAnaCH

laurent.romary@inria.fr

_______________________________________________ Tei-council mailing list Tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council