The plan I believe was to give smaller groups of people something to work on in advance.

That's my vague recollection, too.

I have to admit responsibility for most of the lack of prep this time; a chapter of accidents this morning meant that I only had about 20 minutes to talk to Syd and we never got to a chance to pick any tickets.

I have to disagree with you *completely* on this. It's not your fault that I failed to write down notes about our discussion last time, nor that I have forgotten what we said by now.

Would anyone else like to suggest tickets they'd like to talk about?

Feel free, but don't feel compelled ... I am almost done. I would be done by now but I've spent too much time testing and talking about <classRef> in Pure ODD! :-)

Hi Syd-- Should I feel weird about being the only member of Council left off the list? Elisa (feeling left out) On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 12:24 AM, Syd Bauman wrote:

So I have now realized a serious flaw in my previously posted plan that 2 people liked and no one objected to:

...

... handle ticket assignment to sub-groups of 2-4 people a few days to a week ahead of our meeting, and then use the group teleconference to report on difficulties, successes, ask questions, etc.

Who creates the sub-groups of 2-4 people? Me? I feel a bit uncomfortable in that role, but being as it I have (unwisely) left this to the last minute, I don't see any other way. So, three groups of 4 each, selected alphabetically by first name (in part because that keeps mentees Alejandro and Sarah with their mentors James and Syd):

1. Ticket 125 (https://github.com/TEIC/Stylesheets/issues/125): * Alejandro Bia * Elli Mylonas * Hugh Cayless * James Cummings

2. Ticket 138 (https://github.com/TEIC/Stylesheets/issues/138): * Lou Burnard * Magdalena Turska * Martin Holmes * Martina Scholger

3. Ticket 136 (https://github.com/TEIC/Stylesheets/issues/136): * Peter Stadler * Raffaele Viglianti * Sarah Stanley * Syd Bauman

The goal would be to have at least an e-mail discussion, if not a conference call, about the ticket and make some progress, keeping notes of where the hangups and problems occur for discussion w/ the group. You should feel free, if not outright compelled, to participate in the discussion even if you won't make it to the group conference call.

...

Anyway, we are planning to meet this coming Tue 01 May 18 at 13:00Z. That's * 06:00 PDT (Martin) * 09:00 EDT (Syd, Elisa, Elli, Raff, Sarah, Hugh) * 14:00 BST (James) * 15:00 CEST (Lou, Peter, Martina, Magdalena?) -- 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 Development site: http://newtfire.org

Should I feel weird about being the only member of Council left off the list?

Worse, you should at least be disappointed, if not mad at me! How did this happen? I have no idea. I deliberately copied-and-pasted the list of Council members from the web (where you are prominently listed with the rest), just so I'd spell all names correctly and not miss anyone! $&!%, the best-laid plans. Sigh. Anyway, I think as recompense you get to pick whichever ticket you want: 1. Ticket 125 (https://github.com/TEIC/Stylesheets/issues/125): 2. Ticket 138 (https://github.com/TEIC/Stylesheets/issues/138): 3. Ticket 136 (https://github.com/TEIC/Stylesheets/issues/136): And most likely no one is going to have time to actually solve the ticket, the goal is just to make some progress. I owe you a beer. (Just don't make me drink any this time!)

The goal would be to have at least an e-mail discussion, if not a conference call, about the ticket and make some progress, keeping notes of where the hangups and problems occur for discussion w/ the group.

I think the discussion can happen on the ticket itself, can't it? I don't think trying to arrange a multi-continent conference call is likely to be successful, and I like to see the record of discussions on the tickets so I can remember what I thought and why I thought it. Cheers, Martin On 2018-04-27 09:24 PM, Syd Bauman wrote:

So I have now realized a serious flaw in my previously posted plan that 2 people liked and no one objected to:

...

... handle ticket assignment to sub-groups of 2-4 people a few days to a week ahead of our meeting, and then use the group teleconference to report on difficulties, successes, ask questions, etc.

Who creates the sub-groups of 2-4 people? Me? I feel a bit uncomfortable in that role, but being as it I have (unwisely) left this to the last minute, I don't see any other way. So, three groups of 4 each, selected alphabetically by first name (in part because that keeps mentees Alejandro and Sarah with their mentors James and Syd):

1. Ticket 125 (https://github.com/TEIC/Stylesheets/issues/125): * Alejandro Bia * Elli Mylonas * Hugh Cayless * James Cummings

2. Ticket 138 (https://github.com/TEIC/Stylesheets/issues/138): * Lou Burnard * Magdalena Turska * Martin Holmes * Martina Scholger

3. Ticket 136 (https://github.com/TEIC/Stylesheets/issues/136): * Peter Stadler * Raffaele Viglianti * Sarah Stanley * Syd Bauman

The goal would be to have at least an e-mail discussion, if not a conference call, about the ticket and make some progress, keeping notes of where the hangups and problems occur for discussion w/ the group. You should feel free, if not outright compelled, to participate in the discussion even if you won't make it to the group conference call.

...

Anyway, we are planning to meet this coming Tue 01 May 18 at 13:00Z. That's * 06:00 PDT (Martin) * 09:00 EDT (Syd, Elisa, Elli, Raff, Sarah, Hugh) * 14:00 BST (James) * 15:00 CEST (Lou, Peter, Martina, Magdalena?)