TCM03: TEI Council Conference Call 26 Nov 02
TEI Technical Council: conference call 26 Nov 2002
Lou Burnard
After some initial technical problems caused by LB ill-advisedly trying to use a headset instead of a telephone, the call commenced 1305 GMT, 26 Nov.
The following were present: Syd Bauman (SB), Alex Bia (AB), David Birnbaum (DB), Lou Burnard (LB), Matthew Driscoll (MD), David Durand (DD), Tomaz Erjavec (TE), Merrilee Proffitt (MP), Sebastian Rahtz (SR), Laurent Romary (LR), Chris Ruotolo (CR), Susan Schreibman (SS), John Unsworth (JU), Perry Willett (PW), Christian Wittern (CW).
- Minutes of the last conference call at http://www.tei-c.org/Council/tcm01.xml are in need of revision; SB 30 Nov 02 to revise tcm02. LB agreed to take notes for this one, and to update the list of TEI Council members on the website.
- CR gave an update on activities of the SGML-XML Migration Working Group See materials at http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/MI/. Drafts for the tech reports were due in two weeks; full meeting of the two groups will be 7/8 Feb 03 at MITH. A third meeting would be held to coincide with the Council's ftf meeting in May. SR asked at what stage the technical writer would be needed; CR said their involvement as early as the February meeting would be useful, and wouild be essential from March onwards. LB said that Oxford were still hoping to recruit a replacement for Stuart Brown within that timescale. JU said that a suitable candidate was also available at UVA. LB/JU 31 Dec 02 to resolve technical editor position
- CW gave an update on activities of the Character Encoding Workgroup, and posed some specific questions
"In the reports of the workgroups at MM2 in Chicago, and also in the discussions of the migration WG immediately after that, it became clear (at least to me) that there are some architectural decisions that have to be made on the road to P5. It would make the work of these WG's much easier if some of these decisions could be made in a timely way. What I have in mind here are the following issues, but this is just from my own perspective, whereas the problem area is clearly much larger:
- Can we expect entities to be available in P5? Background: The various XML schema languages have to my knowledge decided to abandon entities. What to we do? (My concern is here more with the TEI 'user space', as opposed to the use of entities internal to DTD processing, which probably would not be affected.) One of the many areas affected would be "Section 6.2 Treatment of Punctuation", which will need some revision anyway.
- Should/could P5 limit the content of attribute values to tokens (and similar material) as opposed to the many attribute values in P4, which allow essentially the same content as in PCDATA. Background: Attribute values are different from PCDATA in that they can not contain other markup constructs. This makes it impossible, for example, to specify language, writing system, readings and the like for the content of attribute values. Additionally, there is some area of conflict between XML:lang and language specification in TEI, which could be cleared up as well. To make this possible, things like <corr sic="foo">bar</corr> would have to be expressed as <seg> <corr>bar</corr> <sic>foo</sic> </seg> Since this would require a considerable change to the architecture of TEI and the view of its underlying text (which could not be considered to be 'simply a concatenation of all #PCDATA in a document', I would appreciate a statement from the council on this."
In answer to the question Can we expect entities to be available in P5?, Council noted that P5 would not define entity sets, but that character entities could be declared as a component of any TEI XML document type declaration. In answer to the question Should/could P5 limit the content of attribute values Council requested clarification from the Workgroup as to what was intended. It was suggested that a document recommending best practice with respect to attribute usage would be helpful. DD reported that there was a possibility that the use of SDATA entities within XML might be included in a forthcoming revision of the standard, and that the TEI should be encouraged to join others in expressing this requirement to W3C.
CW and workgroup 31 Janto draft document on attribute usage
- DD gave an update on the workplan of the Stand-Off Markup Working Group, a revised version of which had been circulated the day before. Key points included recommendations to replace the use of ID/IDREF attributes by xlink/xpointer mechanisms; extended documentation of the usage of different media formats and Xpointer; recommended good practice for corpus applications and referencing mechanisms; a single mechanism for implementation of standoff markup. Drafts were due by 15 Jan 03. In discussion, the Council noted that there was a need to review the overall content of P5, for example, to decide on whether or not the current chapter on networks and trees should be retained; and there was also a need for best practice guidelines on the use of non-TEI namespaces. These would be considered by the Council, by email. All before next meeting to articulate namespace policy and review P5 contents. It was noted that the ODD mechanism could be modified to make the choice of linking mechanism (id/idref or xpointer) a user option. It was also noted that the Xpointer framework itself was now a stable W3C standard, though details of its implementations remained controversial.
- PW reported on the proposed TEI in Libraries Working Group, which had been set up in the wake of JPW's presentation to the Chicago Members Meeting.
TEI in Libraries Working Group
Objectives:
To create a suite of TEI-approved materials and tools to support the use of TEI in a digital library setting, including:
1. A set of guidelines for the use of TEI in libraries, building on the existing document "TEI Text Encoding in Libraries Guidelines" from 1999, and enhancing it by considering library-specific encoding needs and approaches, by updating it to include P4 and XML dtds, and by adding examples and enhanced explanations, recommendations for headers, linking page images to text, use by vendors, etc.; 2. A set of specific dtds for various encoding levels; 3. XSL stylesheets; 4. a working system for search and display, using lightweight, open source components; 5. a set of training documents, with training workshops for librarians.
To do this, the working group will
1. Investigate grant opportunities, particularly with the IMLS for drafting the guidelines, and NEH for training and development activities. (We'll have to restrict the working group to U.S. participants for these grants.) 2. Survey current use of the TEI among digital libraries. We will coordinate with the TEI SGML/XML Conversion Working Group on this activity. 3. Survey development of metadata standards such as METS, MODS, Dublin Core, MARCXML, and others, to give recommendations for their use in conjunction with TEI-encoded files.
Administrative Chair of the workgroup is Perry Willett (Indiana University)
Deadlines * By December 6, working group membership is set. * By January 10, a draft grant proposal for IMLS is finished to be reviewed by working group members. * By January 20, the final draft is readied for submission to IMLS
By March 1, decision to pursue grant funding from the NEH for training component (with a series of short deadlines, ending July 1 with submission of application).
Work via email and perhaps meet as opportunities arise in conjunction with conferences."
Council was very supportive of the proposal, but questioned use of the term workgroup, since the proposal did not involve production of technical input to the Guidelines. Agreed to term it a
task force (the term special interest group was also considered but rejected). It was noted that an explicit association with the TEI of this kind assisted in the project's fundability. Concern was expressed that the group should seek, funding permitting, to involve participation from outside North America.
- LR reported an initiative to work on the current Feature Structure chapters, as a joint TEI/ISO workgroup, under the auspices of ISO TC37/SC4. Members would include Simons and Langendoen, Tomas Erjavec, and representatives from a number of significant research groups active in NLP in France and Germany. Council was supportive of this proposal, noting that it did not require additional funding from TEI. There was some inconclusive discussion about the conduct and status of TEI chartered workgroups not funded by the TEI; would the group have to follow both ISO and TEI procedures, for example. LR was requested to draft a charter for the proposed Group for consideration by the Council. LR 15 Dec 02 to draft charge for the proposed feature structure workgroup and circulate to Council
- Editors' proposal for handling nontrivial changes to the Guidelines (http://www.tei-c.org/Drafts/edw78.html): this item was held over to next meeting due to lack of time
- TEI Adoption/Endorsement of Project Materials. Council discussed suggestions from Charles Faulhaber
the DTD for medieval manuscript transcription is now finished and is available, along with instructions on how to use it at http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Scriptorium/transcription.html We would like to submit it formally for vetting by TEI in the hopes of having it adopted as an official DTD. We're pretty happy with it. I just wish that we had a good character set to go along with it. and David Chesnutt MEP materials: the MEP dtds; the MEP guidelines; the MEP tag library; Although developed specifically for the historical editing community, the DTDs are currently being used by similar literary projects like the Mark Twain letters at UCB and the Thomas Carlyle letters at Duke. Needless to say, I'm very pleased to see the work go beyond our small group of historical editors. following some discussion on the TEI-Council list October 23rd et seq. Council noted that the TEI was not, formally, an archive and could not guarantee to maintain materials on its website indefinitely. It was also noted that Faulhaber's request was apparently for some kind of authentication or endorsement of his specific customisation of the DTD, a concept which several members of the Council found problematic. It was noted that the website already provided a showcase for such TEI applications and would be pleased to accept more.
- Review of workplan and timetable for TEI P5: held over to next meeting
- Status of Master/manuscript description work: held over to next meeting.
- Date and time of next meetings: conference call provisionally scheduled for the same time on 21 Jan 2003; Face-to-Face: May 16 and 17, 2003 (a Friday/Saturday) Rewley House, Oxford. Next Members' Meeting: Friday/Saturday, November 7/8, 2003, Nancy, France.