Teleconference 2016-10-27 13:00 UTC

Present

Apologies

Notes

Begun 14:03Z Introductions (new member = SS!) Notes taken in-line, below. LB joined ~14:45Z

Agenda and minutes

DISLIKE TOLERABLE SUPPORTED
Bookish JC, MT, LB HC, EM, SB EB, KT, RV
Go LB, EB, JC SB, HC PS, MT
Print MS, JC RV, EB, LB, MT EM, HC
Simple RV, HC, SB, EB MT MS, JC, LB
Simple-Print EB EM JC

The decision is really between The Customization as on-ramp, vs. a regular customization. (But every customization is potentially an onramp, so LB don’t think this distinction is helpful.) If Simple becomes a way of alluding to the existence of the Processing Model in the customization, then we can use the hyphenated form of the name (simple-print, simple:epidoc!!) etc. to identify those customizations. Also, not necessary to refer to the processing model in the forward facing doc, so as not to confuse users. (The equation of “uses PM” and “Simple” is one I find a little counterintuitive! LB) JC: Yes. I would stop talking about the Processing Model with regard to Simple -- most people won’t be using the PM, just its results. (Just as most people don’t modify the ODD of TEI Lite, just use it.) (Several operating systems barf on colons in filenames, thus my preference for hyphen or CamelCase or whatever. — SB) The customization is an example of our nascent on-ramp strategy, so the name ought to capture both the strategy and the specific customization:

JC: Simple-Print seems easiest to me. Has benefit of partly maintaining current name it is known by, and explaining it is only about Print.