Minutes from January 27, 2009

Attending: Syd Bauman (notes), Kevin Hawkins (chair), Chris Powell, Melanie Schlosser, Natasha Smith, Rich Wisneski, Perry Willett (notes)


 * Header:
 * see e-mail sent 2009-01-25 by KH for more details
 * everyone should read and response (deadline?)
 * The BPG recommends including series title in  but doesn't mention any other series information. Should we recommend other info like ISSN or series editor? We decided that these would be optional elements.  KH said he would make changes to reflect this.


 * Levels
 * Level 1: CP: thinks &lt;ab> is fine.
 * Level 2: RW: nothing to report
 * Level 3: NS: needs a P5 example
 * PW and CP said this case was envisioned for conversion from HTML at Virginia, so they might have an example. CP said there's still a need for Level 3 as evidenced by the recent post to TEI-L from Martin Mueller asking about &lt;lb>s.
 * Level 4: Linda Cantara no longer working on this, but Matt Gibson is supposed to be. Need to convert example to P5.  SB can do this.
 * Level 5: same is w/ L4
 * we need to add an example or two, although don't need to go into full detail. KH suggested just taking one of the P4 examples and adding some semantic, linguistic, etc. tags. without giving any particular guidance on that.


 * Filenaming:
 * agreed to point to or incorporate IUDLP guidelines
 * agreed to 8-dot-3 health warning [KH: I thought we agreed to warning against using extensions longer than 3 but not on giving any recommendation on the filename before the dot aside from what's in IUDLP.] [SB: My notes have exactly as listed here.]
 * question on ".tei" vs ".xml" extension: agreed to use *.xml extension [KH: I thought we agreed to tell people to be internally consistent but otherwise to use what they want.] [SB: I dunno]
 * agreed that internal consistency is more important than following a particular set of restrictions [I'm going to suggest this become a general recommendation--SB]


 * &lt;ab> vs. &lt;p>:
 * in the pseudo-paras of Level 1 and Level 2 we agreed to &lt;ab>


 * Numbered/unnumbered divs: we agreed that there is no consensus on this issue, and we shouldn't make a recommendation for one over the other. Instead, we should:
 * encourage consistency within texts and collections
 * describe the reasoning behind choosing one
 * describe process of converting one to the other (and provide tools?)
 * recommend a place in the header to record the decision (probably &lt;encodingDecl)
 * schema should enforce consistency within whole file (&lt;front>, &lt;body</tt>, and &lt;back</tt> elements)


 * &lt;pb></tt>s
 * leave recommendation as is (always within &lt;div></tt>s)


 * meeting at DLF Spring Forum in Raleigh NC (May 4-6)
 * KH will check on status of getting a meeting room
 * propose a paper/panel about it?


 * People should remove comments from BPG if they feel the issue has been resolved. KH will make any edits not done by others before our next meeting. Next we need to get examples and then do the ODDs.