ODD processing always has a surprise up its virtual sleeve. Let's suppose your ODD wants to add <persName> and <orgName> and <placeName> from the namesdates module. Let's further suppose you want to see only W3C date values in your dating attributes. So your ODD has something like this <moduleRef key="namesdates" include="orgName persName placeName"/> <classSpec type="atts" ident="att.datable-iso" mode="delete" module="namesdates"/> <classSpec type="atts" ident="att.datable-custom" mode="delete" module="namesdates"/> Sound plausible? But it doesn't do what you expect. In the first place, the presence of the module attribute on <classSpec> generates the following entirely mysterious schematron error : E [ISO Schematron] Specification att.datable-custom: the value of the module attribute ("namesdates") should correspond to an existing module, via a moduleSpec or moduleRef In the second place, the moduleRef to namesdates will naturally include those classes along with the elements you've requested. In the third place, if you realise this is happening (and you are a smart ODD coookie if you do), you can replace the moduleref with elementRefs for the elements you want <elementRef key=orgName/> <elementRef key="persName"/> <elementRef key="placeName"/> Whereupon, huzza, those pesky classes disappear. Not because of your <classSpec>s of course, but because you've removed the moduleRef` In fact you can remove the classSpecs completely: if there is any way to delete a class which is specific to a module (i.e. not defined in the tei module), this isn't it, though it works fine for classes which *are* defined in that module.
Whoa, I just received this email even though it claims to have been sent three days ago. Did anyone else just receive it? Lou, can you verify that your mail client doesn't think it's still 15 June? Just want to determine if there's something with our mail list that I need to look into ... Kevin On 6/15/15 11:32 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
ODD processing always has a surprise up its virtual sleeve. Let's suppose your ODD wants to add <persName> and <orgName> and <placeName> from the namesdates module. Let's further suppose you want to see only W3C date values in your dating attributes.
So your ODD has something like this
<moduleRef key="namesdates" include="orgName persName placeName"/> <classSpec type="atts" ident="att.datable-iso" mode="delete" module="namesdates"/> <classSpec type="atts" ident="att.datable-custom" mode="delete" module="namesdates"/>
Sound plausible? But it doesn't do what you expect.
In the first place, the presence of the module attribute on <classSpec> generates the following entirely mysterious schematron error :
E [ISO Schematron] Specification att.datable-custom: the value of the module attribute ("namesdates") should correspond to an existing module, via a moduleSpec or moduleRef
In the second place, the moduleRef to namesdates will naturally include those classes along with the elements you've requested.
In the third place, if you realise this is happening (and you are a smart ODD coookie if you do), you can replace the moduleref with elementRefs for the elements you want
<elementRef key=orgName/> <elementRef key="persName"/> <elementRef key="placeName"/>
Whereupon, huzza, those pesky classes disappear. Not because of your <classSpec>s of course, but because you've removed the moduleRef`
In fact you can remove the classSpecs completely: if there is any way to delete a class which is specific to a module (i.e. not defined in the tei module), this isn't it, though it works fine for classes which *are* defined in that module.
Don't panic. It's been sitting in my "unsent mail" for three days because I didnt have any internet when I wrote it. This is a feature of Thunderbord, I think. On 18/06/15 19:19, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
Whoa, I just received this email even though it claims to have been sent three days ago. Did anyone else just receive it? Lou, can you verify that your mail client doesn't think it's still 15 June? Just want to determine if there's something with our mail list that I need to look into ...
Kevin
On 6/15/15 11:32 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
ODD processing always has a surprise up its virtual sleeve. Let's suppose your ODD wants to add <persName> and <orgName> and <placeName> from the namesdates module. Let's further suppose you want to see only W3C date values in your dating attributes.
So your ODD has something like this
<moduleRef key="namesdates" include="orgName persName placeName"/> <classSpec type="atts" ident="att.datable-iso" mode="delete" module="namesdates"/> <classSpec type="atts" ident="att.datable-custom" mode="delete" module="namesdates"/>
Sound plausible? But it doesn't do what you expect.
In the first place, the presence of the module attribute on <classSpec> generates the following entirely mysterious schematron error :
E [ISO Schematron] Specification att.datable-custom: the value of the module attribute ("namesdates") should correspond to an existing module, via a moduleSpec or moduleRef
In the second place, the moduleRef to namesdates will naturally include those classes along with the elements you've requested.
In the third place, if you realise this is happening (and you are a smart ODD coookie if you do), you can replace the moduleref with elementRefs for the elements you want
<elementRef key=orgName/> <elementRef key="persName"/> <elementRef key="placeName"/>
Whereupon, huzza, those pesky classes disappear. Not because of your <classSpec>s of course, but because you've removed the moduleRef`
In fact you can remove the classSpecs completely: if there is any way to delete a class which is specific to a module (i.e. not defined in the tei module), this isn't it, though it works fine for classes which *are* defined in that module.
I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from Kevin. Perhaps something is wrong. Cheers, Martin On 15-06-18 11:26 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
Don't panic. It's been sitting in my "unsent mail" for three days because I didnt have any internet when I wrote it. This is a feature of Thunderbord, I think.
On 18/06/15 19:19, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
Whoa, I just received this email even though it claims to have been sent three days ago. Did anyone else just receive it? Lou, can you verify that your mail client doesn't think it's still 15 June? Just want to determine if there's something with our mail list that I need to look into ...
Kevin
On 6/15/15 11:32 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
ODD processing always has a surprise up its virtual sleeve. Let's suppose your ODD wants to add <persName> and <orgName> and <placeName> from the namesdates module. Let's further suppose you want to see only W3C date values in your dating attributes.
So your ODD has something like this
<moduleRef key="namesdates" include="orgName persName placeName"/> <classSpec type="atts" ident="att.datable-iso" mode="delete" module="namesdates"/> <classSpec type="atts" ident="att.datable-custom" mode="delete" module="namesdates"/>
Sound plausible? But it doesn't do what you expect.
In the first place, the presence of the module attribute on <classSpec> generates the following entirely mysterious schematron error :
E [ISO Schematron] Specification att.datable-custom: the value of the module attribute ("namesdates") should correspond to an existing module, via a moduleSpec or moduleRef
In the second place, the moduleRef to namesdates will naturally include those classes along with the elements you've requested.
In the third place, if you realise this is happening (and you are a smart ODD coookie if you do), you can replace the moduleref with elementRefs for the elements you want
<elementRef key=orgName/> <elementRef key="persName"/> <elementRef key="placeName"/>
Whereupon, huzza, those pesky classes disappear. Not because of your <classSpec>s of course, but because you've removed the moduleRef`
In fact you can remove the classSpecs completely: if there is any way to delete a class which is specific to a module (i.e. not defined in the tei module), this isn't it, though it works fine for classes which *are* defined in that module.
Maybe try scrolling up in your inbox? If you have them sorted by date (but not "date received"), it would have been filed with the messages from 15 June. On 6/18/15 1:36 PM, Martin Holmes wrote:
I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from Kevin. Perhaps something is wrong.
Cheers, Martin
No, I definitely don't have it anywhere. I have four much shorter messages between Lou and Sebastian with the header: oddbyexample gotcha which don't contain the detail that was in the longer message you first sent to the list. Cheers, Martin On 15-06-18 11:43 AM, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
Maybe try scrolling up in your inbox? If you have them sorted by date (but not "date received"), it would have been filed with the messages from 15 June.
On 6/18/15 1:36 PM, Martin Holmes wrote:
I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from Kevin. Perhaps something is wrong.
Cheers, Martin
For the record, I got the old message. (Martin: also check your junkmail, as post- or pre-dated email is sometimes a junkmail trigger.) It appears in my mail client (thunderbird) as if it was sent on 15th. It appeared on my phone as arriving on the 18th. This is most likely just a queued email while Lou was off wifi. -James On 18/06/15 20:37, Martin Holmes wrote:
No, I definitely don't have it anywhere. I have four much shorter messages between Lou and Sebastian with the header:
oddbyexample gotcha
which don't contain the detail that was in the longer message you first sent to the list.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-18 11:43 AM, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
Maybe try scrolling up in your inbox? If you have them sorted by date (but not "date received"), it would have been filed with the messages from 15 June.
On 6/18/15 1:36 PM, Martin Holmes wrote:
I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from Kevin. Perhaps something is wrong.
Cheers, Martin
-- Dr James Cummings, James.Cummings@it.ox.ac.uk Academic IT Services, University of Oxford
Good call, James. The Outlook server had flagged the message as junk. I've never had a Council message flagged as junk before. Cheers, Martin On 15-06-19 04:09 AM, James Cummings wrote:
For the record, I got the old message. (Martin: also check your junkmail, as post- or pre-dated email is sometimes a junkmail trigger.) It appears in my mail client (thunderbird) as if it was sent on 15th. It appeared on my phone as arriving on the 18th.
This is most likely just a queued email while Lou was off wifi.
-James
On 18/06/15 20:37, Martin Holmes wrote:
No, I definitely don't have it anywhere. I have four much shorter messages between Lou and Sebastian with the header:
oddbyexample gotcha
which don't contain the detail that was in the longer message you first sent to the list.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-18 11:43 AM, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
Maybe try scrolling up in your inbox? If you have them sorted by date (but not "date received"), it would have been filed with the messages from 15 June.
On 6/18/15 1:36 PM, Martin Holmes wrote:
I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from Kevin. Perhaps something is wrong.
Cheers, Martin
Good, well now we've got the meta-issues out of the way, does anyone have anything to say on the content of the message? On 19/06/15 13:46, Martin Holmes wrote:
Good call, James. The Outlook server had flagged the message as junk. I've never had a Council message flagged as junk before.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-19 04:09 AM, James Cummings wrote:
For the record, I got the old message. (Martin: also check your junkmail, as post- or pre-dated email is sometimes a junkmail trigger.) It appears in my mail client (thunderbird) as if it was sent on 15th. It appeared on my phone as arriving on the 18th.
This is most likely just a queued email while Lou was off wifi.
-James
On 18/06/15 20:37, Martin Holmes wrote:
No, I definitely don't have it anywhere. I have four much shorter messages between Lou and Sebastian with the header:
oddbyexample gotcha
which don't contain the detail that was in the longer message you first sent to the list.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-18 11:43 AM, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
Maybe try scrolling up in your inbox? If you have them sorted by date (but not "date received"), it would have been filed with the messages from 15 June.
On 6/18/15 1:36 PM, Martin Holmes wrote:
I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from Kevin. Perhaps something is wrong.
Cheers, Martin
Oh? You want us to *read* the message. No, I never claimed I did that. :-) -James On 19/06/15 17:10, Lou Burnard wrote:
Good, well now we've got the meta-issues out of the way, does anyone have anything to say on the content of the message?
On 19/06/15 13:46, Martin Holmes wrote:
Good call, James. The Outlook server had flagged the message as junk. I've never had a Council message flagged as junk before.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-19 04:09 AM, James Cummings wrote:
For the record, I got the old message. (Martin: also check your junkmail, as post- or pre-dated email is sometimes a junkmail trigger.) It appears in my mail client (thunderbird) as if it was sent on 15th. It appeared on my phone as arriving on the 18th.
This is most likely just a queued email while Lou was off wifi.
-James
On 18/06/15 20:37, Martin Holmes wrote:
No, I definitely don't have it anywhere. I have four much shorter messages between Lou and Sebastian with the header:
oddbyexample gotcha
which don't contain the detail that was in the longer message you first sent to the list.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-18 11:43 AM, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
Maybe try scrolling up in your inbox? If you have them sorted by date (but not "date received"), it would have been filed with the messages from 15 June.
On 6/18/15 1:36 PM, Martin Holmes wrote:
I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from Kevin. Perhaps something is wrong.
Cheers, Martin
-- Dr James Cummings, James.Cummings@it.ox.ac.uk Academic IT Services, University of Oxford
Well, don't bother with that one. Here's another one. The current draft for purified datatype specification allows for three possibilities on <dataRef>: (a) you reference a W3C datatype using @name (b) you reference a TEI-defined datatype using @key (c) you reference some-other-guys-defined set of datatypes using @ref My question: can anyone come up with an example for case (c) ???? or shall we just leave that in as a concession to TEI-political-correctness, without bothering to try to implement it? On 19/06/15 17:16, James Cummings wrote:
Oh? You want us to *read* the message.
No, I never claimed I did that. :-)
-James
On 19/06/15 17:10, Lou Burnard wrote:
Good, well now we've got the meta-issues out of the way, does anyone have anything to say on the content of the message?
On 19/06/15 13:46, Martin Holmes wrote:
Good call, James. The Outlook server had flagged the message as junk. I've never had a Council message flagged as junk before.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-19 04:09 AM, James Cummings wrote:
For the record, I got the old message. (Martin: also check your junkmail, as post- or pre-dated email is sometimes a junkmail trigger.) It appears in my mail client (thunderbird) as if it was sent on 15th. It appeared on my phone as arriving on the 18th.
This is most likely just a queued email while Lou was off wifi.
-James
On 18/06/15 20:37, Martin Holmes wrote:
No, I definitely don't have it anywhere. I have four much shorter messages between Lou and Sebastian with the header:
oddbyexample gotcha
which don't contain the detail that was in the longer message you first sent to the list.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-18 11:43 AM, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
Maybe try scrolling up in your inbox? If you have them sorted by date (but not "date received"), it would have been filed with the messages from 15 June.
On 6/18/15 1:36 PM, Martin Holmes wrote: > I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from > Kevin. Perhaps > something is wrong. > > Cheers, > Martin
You might use a JavaScript data type. JS has "Null" and "Undefined" as primitives, and ECMAScript 6 introduces "Symbol". I can't imagine how we would use those, though. Another possibility is to define an element as containing JSON (ECMA 404): http://json.org/ I can see how that might be useful. A fairly nightmarish regex could validate JSON. Cheers, Martin On 15-06-19 10:48 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
Well, don't bother with that one. Here's another one.
The current draft for purified datatype specification allows for three possibilities on <dataRef>:
(a) you reference a W3C datatype using @name (b) you reference a TEI-defined datatype using @key (c) you reference some-other-guys-defined set of datatypes using @ref
My question: can anyone come up with an example for case (c) ????
or shall we just leave that in as a concession to TEI-political-correctness, without bothering to try to implement it?
On 19/06/15 17:16, James Cummings wrote:
Oh? You want us to *read* the message.
No, I never claimed I did that. :-)
-James
On 19/06/15 17:10, Lou Burnard wrote:
Good, well now we've got the meta-issues out of the way, does anyone have anything to say on the content of the message?
On 19/06/15 13:46, Martin Holmes wrote:
Good call, James. The Outlook server had flagged the message as junk. I've never had a Council message flagged as junk before.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-19 04:09 AM, James Cummings wrote:
For the record, I got the old message. (Martin: also check your junkmail, as post- or pre-dated email is sometimes a junkmail trigger.) It appears in my mail client (thunderbird) as if it was sent on 15th. It appeared on my phone as arriving on the 18th.
This is most likely just a queued email while Lou was off wifi.
-James
On 18/06/15 20:37, Martin Holmes wrote:
No, I definitely don't have it anywhere. I have four much shorter messages between Lou and Sebastian with the header:
oddbyexample gotcha
which don't contain the detail that was in the longer message you first sent to the list.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-18 11:43 AM, Kevin Hawkins wrote: > Maybe try scrolling up in your inbox? If you have them sorted > by date > (but not "date received"), it would have been filed with the > messages > from 15 June. > > On 6/18/15 1:36 PM, Martin Holmes wrote: >> I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from >> Kevin. Perhaps >> something is wrong. >> >> Cheers, >> Martin
Can you give a bit more detail on how this might work in practice? On 19/06/15 18:56, Martin Holmes wrote:
You might use a JavaScript data type. JS has "Null" and "Undefined" as primitives, and ECMAScript 6 introduces "Symbol". I can't imagine how we would use those, though.
Another possibility is to define an element as containing JSON (ECMA 404):
I can see how that might be useful. A fairly nightmarish regex could validate JSON.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-19 10:48 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
Well, don't bother with that one. Here's another one.
The current draft for purified datatype specification allows for three possibilities on <dataRef>:
(a) you reference a W3C datatype using @name (b) you reference a TEI-defined datatype using @key (c) you reference some-other-guys-defined set of datatypes using @ref
My question: can anyone come up with an example for case (c) ????
or shall we just leave that in as a concession to TEI-political-correctness, without bothering to try to implement it?
On 19/06/15 17:16, James Cummings wrote:
Oh? You want us to *read* the message.
No, I never claimed I did that. :-)
-James
On 19/06/15 17:10, Lou Burnard wrote:
Good, well now we've got the meta-issues out of the way, does anyone have anything to say on the content of the message?
On 19/06/15 13:46, Martin Holmes wrote:
Good call, James. The Outlook server had flagged the message as junk. I've never had a Council message flagged as junk before.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-19 04:09 AM, James Cummings wrote:
For the record, I got the old message. (Martin: also check your junkmail, as post- or pre-dated email is sometimes a junkmail trigger.) It appears in my mail client (thunderbird) as if it was sent on 15th. It appeared on my phone as arriving on the 18th.
This is most likely just a queued email while Lou was off wifi.
-James
On 18/06/15 20:37, Martin Holmes wrote: > No, I definitely don't have it anywhere. I have four much > shorter > messages between Lou and Sebastian with the header: > > oddbyexample gotcha > > which don't contain the detail that was in the longer message > you > first sent to the list. > > Cheers, > Martin > > On 15-06-18 11:43 AM, Kevin Hawkins wrote: >> Maybe try scrolling up in your inbox? If you have them sorted >> by date >> (but not "date received"), it would have been filed with the >> messages >> from 15 June. >> >> On 6/18/15 1:36 PM, Martin Holmes wrote: >>> I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from >>> Kevin. Perhaps >>> something is wrong. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Martin
A possible example might be: Redefine <geo> so that it explicitly contains GeoJson: http://geojson.org/geojson-spec.html I'm not sure whether this qualifies as a datatype, strictly speaking; the JSON standard itself defines some datatypes. It's a rule-based constrained structure which can be parsed into an object, and it can be validated. You'd probably only want to use it in the content model for an element, but with appropriate escaping it could also function as an attribute value, albeit a huge one. It all depends on what we mean by a datatype. What does TEI mean by "datatype"? Cheers, Martin On 15-06-19 11:17 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
Can you give a bit more detail on how this might work in practice?
On 19/06/15 18:56, Martin Holmes wrote:
You might use a JavaScript data type. JS has "Null" and "Undefined" as primitives, and ECMAScript 6 introduces "Symbol". I can't imagine how we would use those, though.
Another possibility is to define an element as containing JSON (ECMA 404):
I can see how that might be useful. A fairly nightmarish regex could validate JSON.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-19 10:48 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
Well, don't bother with that one. Here's another one.
The current draft for purified datatype specification allows for three possibilities on <dataRef>:
(a) you reference a W3C datatype using @name (b) you reference a TEI-defined datatype using @key (c) you reference some-other-guys-defined set of datatypes using @ref
My question: can anyone come up with an example for case (c) ????
or shall we just leave that in as a concession to TEI-political-correctness, without bothering to try to implement it?
On 19/06/15 17:16, James Cummings wrote:
Oh? You want us to *read* the message.
No, I never claimed I did that. :-)
-James
On 19/06/15 17:10, Lou Burnard wrote:
Good, well now we've got the meta-issues out of the way, does anyone have anything to say on the content of the message?
On 19/06/15 13:46, Martin Holmes wrote:
Good call, James. The Outlook server had flagged the message as junk. I've never had a Council message flagged as junk before.
Cheers, Martin
On 15-06-19 04:09 AM, James Cummings wrote: > > For the record, I got the old message. (Martin: also check your > junkmail, as post- or pre-dated email is sometimes a junkmail > trigger.) > It appears in my mail client (thunderbird) as if it was sent > on 15th. It > appeared on my phone as arriving on the 18th. > > This is most likely just a queued email while Lou was off wifi. > > -James > > > On 18/06/15 20:37, Martin Holmes wrote: >> No, I definitely don't have it anywhere. I have four much >> shorter >> messages between Lou and Sebastian with the header: >> >> oddbyexample gotcha >> >> which don't contain the detail that was in the longer message >> you >> first sent to the list. >> >> Cheers, >> Martin >> >> On 15-06-18 11:43 AM, Kevin Hawkins wrote: >>> Maybe try scrolling up in your inbox? If you have them sorted >>> by date >>> (but not "date received"), it would have been filed with the >>> messages >>> from 15 June. >>> >>> On 6/18/15 1:36 PM, Martin Holmes wrote: >>>> I didn't get it from the Council list, though; just from >>>> Kevin. Perhaps >>>> something is wrong. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Martin > >
On 19/06/15 20:08, Martin Holmes wrote:
A possible example might be:
Redefine <geo> so that it explicitly contains GeoJson:
http://geojson.org/geojson-spec.html
I'm not sure whether this qualifies as a datatype, strictly speaking; the JSON standard itself defines some datatypes. It's a rule-based constrained structure which can be parsed into an object, and it can be validated. You'd probably only want to use it in the content model for an element, but with appropriate escaping it could also function as an attribute value, albeit a huge one.
I can't see this being an attribute value either.
It all depends on what we mean by a datatype. What does TEI mean by "datatype"?
We mean (informally speaking) an abstraction which defines the set of possible values for some attribute or attributes. Or so I believe.
On 15-06-22 10:16 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:
On 19/06/15 20:08, Martin Holmes wrote:
A possible example might be:
Redefine <geo> so that it explicitly contains GeoJson:
http://geojson.org/geojson-spec.html
I'm not sure whether this qualifies as a datatype, strictly speaking; the JSON standard itself defines some datatypes. It's a rule-based constrained structure which can be parsed into an object, and it can be validated. You'd probably only want to use it in the content model for an element, but with appropriate escaping it could also function as an attribute value, albeit a huge one.
I can't see this being an attribute value either.
I can actually see people putting GeoJSON into the @n attribute on <geo>, or (more likely) creating a new @geojson attribute for <geo> to contain it. There's no limit on the size of attribute values, after all.
It all depends on what we mean by a datatype. What does TEI mean by "datatype"?
We mean (informally speaking) an abstraction which defines the set of possible values for some attribute or attributes. Or so I believe.
So we're never going to constrain element content based on datatypes? Cheers, Martin
On 22/06/15 19:07, Martin Holmes wrote:
It all depends on what we mean by a datatype. What does TEI mean by "datatype"?
We mean (informally speaking) an abstraction which defines the set of possible values for some attribute or attributes. Or so I believe.
So we're never going to constrain element content based on datatypes?
This is an interesting question. Here is what I know so far:
1., Yes, syntactically at least, you can certainly say
<content>
participants (4)
-
James Cummings -
Kevin Hawkins -
Lou Burnard -
Martin Holmes