New subject: [tei-council] Notes on standoff

6 May 2015

      I’m finally getting a chance to look seriously at the standoff ODD and so I wanted to pull together my own notes and get some discussion going here that we can feed back to the proposers.

1) Why such an elaborate header? (see https://github.com/laurentromary/stdfSpec/blob/master/Specification/standoff... https://github.com/laurentromary/stdfSpec/blob/master/Specification/standoff...) I can understand wanting to have some description of the content of <stdf> (or <ldb> as Syd proposed—I happen to like that better), but this seems maybe a bit overboard. Why can’t the document’s own revisionDesc serve to document revisions to the standoff section, for example?

2) Since standoff elements can nest, why do we need the <annotations> element? (see https://github.com/laurentromary/stdfSpec/blob/master/Specification/standoff... https://github.com/laurentromary/stdfSpec/blob/master/Specification/standoff...). Wouldn’t it be simpler to allow the standoff element just to contain a heading and its content, optionally including more standoff elements?

3) I can sort of guess what <mapStruct> might be for, but it isn’t very clear (see https://github.com/laurentromary/stdfSpec/blob/master/Specification/standoff... https://github.com/laurentromary/stdfSpec/blob/master/Specification/standoff...). Do we not already have sufficient mechanisms for attaching standoff markup to its targets?

That’s all I’ve got for now. What do you think?

We’re going to beam Laurent in for a discussion at the F2F on Friday the 29th at 10:00.

Notes on standoff

Hugh Cayless

Peter Stadler

Laurent Romary

Peter Stadler

Laurent Romary

Laurent Romary

tags

participants (3)