TEI Council Conference Call of Mon, 29 Nov 04

Initials Used for People

SBSyd Bauman
ABAlejandro Bia
DBDavid Birnbaum
LBLou Burnard
JCJames Cummings
MDMatthew Driscoll
DDDavid Durand
JFJulia Flanders
SRSebastian Rahtz
LRLaurent Romary
SSSusan Schreibman
NSNatasha Smith
PTPaul Tremblay
EVEdward Vanhoutte
JWJohn Walsh
PWPerry Willett
CWChristian Wittern

All times are UTC unless otherwise noted.

Present were SB, DB, LB, JC, MD, DD, JF, SR, SS, NS, JW, PW, and CW. Not present were AB, LR, and EV.

Call commendced at 13:00.

Revision of content model for choice LB reported that some progress has been made, and he thinks the action completed.
Post updated version of SO W 09 to Council Done.
Check in updated version of SA SB reports that this action was deliberately deferred due to
- expressions of concern that TEI should not be moving to URI References, and
- the need to have the style-sheets updated simultaneously or before changing P5 source
Finalize draft of MS MD reports that the draft has been completed, but has not been announced anywhere. It was noted that there has already been some feedback, as it was announced as part of the Members' Meeting MS SIG report. Council agreed that once the draft was publicized, comments on it should receive rapid attention from the MS taskforce, and urged MD to announce draft far and wide immediately.
propose a method of managing SF feature requests so as to facilitate gathering of input from Council members SB reported that LB has gone through artifacts and assigned priority. LB expressed doubt as to whether this was actually a good idea or not; suggesting that Council members should feel free to look at and comment on any items in which they were personally interested. It was suggested that all Council members should sign up for Sourceforge user accounts, such that they could receive notification of updates to feature requests. SB thought that after signing up, Council members may have to sign up for notifications on an artifact-by-artifact basis.

MM Baltimore reportLB reported that a general SIGs report, some individual SIGs, and some talks are now available on theweb; SS believes the other SIGs should be reporting soon. LB said the meeting was well attended, and lots of good discussions were had over lunches & in hallways, etc.LB stated that prior to the Members' Meeting there had been an expression of concern over the conversion of legacy data to P5, and that in response to this he and SR had created a P4 compatibility mode on the flight over, which was presented to membership. The membership present had expressed an overall feeling of why would I want one of those?. There seemed to be general agreement that we should keep P4 compatibility mode in the background, and bring it out if and when there is a call for it.

SanskritLB thinks the Sanskritters have a desire to use TEI for general interchange, but also want detailed validation. After some discussion, there seemed to be agreement that there are three ways to achieve this:

Schematron (either included as part of P5 or used separately)
raw schema (which would require significant changes to ODD)
syntactic sugar

and that it is a very general problem (relating to those who wish to constrain subsections to exist only inside sections, e.g.) The current suggestion is to agree to their recommendations that seg be used, with some validation mechanism to follow. CW draft a reply to Sanskritters and post it to council This problem, with a Sanskrit example, can show up in the Guidelines as an example of how to use seg in choice.

MeetingsWe'd like to hold a face to face meeting in late April or early May. The following expressed the possibility of hosting:

MD, Copenhagen
JC, Oxford
SS, Maryland

It was pointed out that cost will be a large concern with this meeting.MD, JC, SS each to post a brief summary to the council list of the anticipated cost of hosting a meeting at his her locale, in particular of lodging With the upcoming departure of DD, the Council needs a new host for conference calls. JW said he could host, using the same mechanism PW has used in the past. This turns out to be expensive for Europeans, but CW feels it is still probably less expensive overall, and so graciously accepts JW's offer.

Work-groupsA brief report from PB has been sent, but not in time for the call. No change in FS xml colon thingYes, Council agreed on use of xml:id (declared as W3C suggests, we think ID) and xml:lang (declared where possible as xsd:language, using the Ghent improved Nancy Hack, i.e. an ident on language). SO W 09SR raised a concern over the inconsistency of the target attribute. It was pointed out that this inconsistency is just a duplication of what is currently in P4, where all targets attributes are IDREFS, but not all target attributes are IDREF, some are IDREFS. SB thought there was a reason for some, if not all, of these apparent discrepancies, but could not recall them. Council agreed that this should be looked into with an eye to making names consistent.Council agreed on the substantive issues brought up by SO W 09, with the exception of the details of the new xpointer schemes, concerning which discussion was deferred.

style-sheetsCouncil raised a concern that SR's stylesheets are mistakenly viewed by TEI community as intended to be exemplary. JF suggested making the domain space of TEI stylesheets larger, to provide more examples, perhaps through a contest or call for submissions from the TEI community. JW agrees. JF2004-12-15 send to council list a proposal for call or contest for getting additional style-sheets for TEI No one was entirely sure, but SB thought it might be the case that the current release of SR's style-sheets are on Sourceforge, and that those on the TEI site are out of date. SR Ensure that the version of style-sheets available from the TEI site is the current release (even if that means that what is on the TEI site is no more than a pointer to the download from Sourceforge) biblItemIt was suggested that a small group look at the broader view around this issue, and recommend the best approach in general. Specifically to consider whether some other standard is sufficient, and if not, to examine the current proposal and perhaps recommend changes. PW contact PT to research broader problem of how P5 should encode bibliographies.It was noted that we do not know who, other than PT, participated in the creation of the current proposal.

all read artifacts on TEI Sourceforge feature requests tracker and post comments, even if comment is just I agree.

Next conference call scheduled for Mon 31 Jan at 13:00 UTC.

Call ended at 14:37