June 6, 2016 - Revision history

Kshawkin: /* Issue 3 */ removed stray linebreak

2016-07-12T00:32:35Z

‎Issue 3: removed stray linebreak

Kshawkin: made top-level headings h2s instead of h1s per common MediaWiki style

2016-07-12T00:32:09Z

made top-level headings h2s instead of h1s per common MediaWiki style

Kshawkin: /* Issue 15 */ Syd has completed this

2016-06-09T18:40:34Z

‎Issue 15: Syd has completed this

Kshawkin: /* Issue 25 */ copyediting and wiki markup

2016-06-09T18:39:23Z

‎Issue 25: copyediting and wiki markup

Kshawkin: /* Issue 8 */ typo

2016-06-09T18:38:17Z

‎Issue 8: typo

Kshawkin: added wiki categories

2016-06-09T18:37:35Z

added wiki categories

Kshawkin: /* Issue 24 */ added status of this issue

2016-06-09T18:35:27Z

‎Issue 24: added status of this issue

Kshawkin: /* Issue 5 */ copyediting

2016-06-09T18:26:52Z

‎Issue 5: copyediting

Peter Gorman: Created page with "June 6, 2016 =Attendees= * Kevin S. Hawkins (University of North Texas Libraries) * Syd Bauman (Northeastern University Libraries) * Peter Gorman (University of Wisconsin–Mad..."

2016-06-09T17:26:03Z

Created page with "June 6, 2016 =Attendees= * Kevin S. Hawkins (University of North Texas Libraries) * Syd Bauman (Northeastern University Libraries) * Peter Gorman (University of Wisconsin–Mad..."

New page

June 6, 2016

=Attendees=

* Kevin S. Hawkins (University of North Texas Libraries)
* Syd Bauman (Northeastern University Libraries)
* Peter Gorman (University of Wisconsin–Madison Libraries) (recorder)

=Ticket Triage=

* Bauman noticed that the build process for the ODD files is broken, because it relies on resources that no longer exist. Bauman will open a new Git Issue for it. [done]

===Issue 3===

* Mostly complete, but Gorman will finish the remaining tasks, mainly updating the examples throughout the document.

===Issue 5===

* Bauman noted that there are actually 4 options: @key, @seeRef (though not available for all elements), tag URIs (RFC 4151), or private URI/prefixDef. Hawkins added @xml:base. They can be used in combination, as well: a short private URI can be created that expands to a tag URI.

* Bauman observed that tag URIs have advantage of being externally defined, and hence may be useful in other contexts, while private URI/prefixDef (http://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/Prefix_Definition_Proposal) is specific to TEI.

* Recommendation: encoders should use tag URI instead of @key, but may use private URI/prefixDef if it better suits a project's needs, or if other URI schemes prove to be too cumbersome.

* Hawkins will update the ticket [done]

===Issue 8===

* Recommendation: do not change the discussion ofextent> in BPTL. Issue withdrawn.

===Issue 15===

* Gorman and Bauman thought that <distinct> would be useful for texts at level 4. Even though it adds to an already large tagset, it it usefully distinct from existing elements.

* Recommendation: add <distinct> to BPTL level 4. Assigned to Bauman.

===Issue 18===

* Group discussed which of the two approaches outlines in the ticket would be the lesser evil. Bauman noted that option "A" is not valid TEI. Option B does not improve the upgrade path from Level 1 to 2 or 2 to 3, and may in fact create work in restructuring block-level elements (i.e., fprm pages to paragraphs).

* Recommendation: do not change existing guidelines.

===Issue 24===

* Since event tagging is not provided for in TEI, this Working Group cannot express this proposal as a constraint of TEI.

* Recommendation: propose this to the TEI Council as a feature request.

* Hawkins will close the Issue.

===Issue 25===

* The group was uncertain what specific action is being requested; is it about adding to the table of MARC/teiHeader mappings? If there are elements in the body that would enhance a MARC record, would they have to be expressed in a new table? Could we even make feasible suggestions (e.g., algorithmically adding <name>s as MARC 6xx or 7xx fields) that would be compatible with RDA?

* It may be possible to extract a table of contents from a document's <div> structure and <heads>, e.g., to create a MARC 505 field. That would not be a recommendation for the teiHeader per se, unless the suggestion is to replicate ToC information in the teiHeader - but then the body and teiHeader could fall out of sync.

* Hawkins will add a comment to the ticket asking for clarification of this issue. [done]

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:32, 12 July 2016
Line 14:		Line 14:

	* Mostly complete, but Gorman will finish the remaining tasks, mainly updating the examples throughout the document.		* Mostly complete, but Gorman will finish the remaining tasks, mainly updating the examples throughout the document.
−

	===Issue 5===		===Issue 5===

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:37, 9 June 2016
Line 57:		Line 57:

	* Hawkins will add a comment to the ticket asking for clarification of this issue. [done]		* Hawkins will add a comment to the ticket asking for clarification of this issue. [done]
		+
		+	[[Category:Workgroup to revise the Best Practices for TEI in Libraries]]
		+	[[Category:SIG:Libraries]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 June 6, 2016
-=Attendees=
+==Attendees==
 * Kevin S. Hawkins (University of North Texas Libraries)
@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 * Peter Gorman (University of Wisconsin–Madison Libraries) (recorder)
-=Ticket Triage=
+==Ticket Triage==
 * Bauman noticed that the build process for the ODD files is broken, because it relies on resources that no longer exist. Bauman will open a new Git Issue for it. [done]

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 * Gorman and Bauman thought that <distinct> would be useful for texts at level 4. Even though it adds to an already large tagset, it it usefully distinct from existing elements.
-* Recommendation:  add <distinct> to BPTL level 4. Assigned to Bauman.
+* Recommendation:  add <distinct> to BPTL level 4. Assigned to Bauman. [done]
 ===Issue 18===

@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 ===Issue 25===
-* The group was uncertain what specific action is being requested; is it about adding to the table of MARC/teiHeader mappings? If there are elements in the body that would enhance a MARC record, would they have to be expressed in a new table? Could we even make feasible suggestions (e.g., algorithmically adding <name>s as MARC 6xx or 7xx fields) that would be compatible with RDA?
+* The group was uncertain what specific action is being requested; is it about adding to the table of MARC/teiHeader mappings? If there are elements in the body that would enhance a MARC record, would they have to be expressed in a new table? Could we even make feasible suggestions (e.g., algorithmically adding &lt;name>s as MARC 6xx or 7xx fields) that would be compatible with RDA?
-* It may be possible to extract a table of contents from a document's <div> structure and <heads>, e.g., to create a MARC 505 field. That would not be a recommendation for the teiHeader per se, unless the suggestion is to replicate ToC information in the teiHeader - but then the body and teiHeader could fall out of sync.
+* It may be possible to extract a table of contents from a document's &lt;div> structure and &lt;head>s, e.g., to create a MARC 505 field. That would not be a recommendation for the teiHeader per se, unless the suggestion is to replicate ToC information in the teiHeader - but then the body and teiHeader could fall out of sync.
 * Hawkins will add a comment to the ticket asking for clarification of this issue. [done]

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 ===Issue 8===
-* Recommendation: do not change the discussion ofextent> in BPTL. Issue withdrawn.
+* Recommendation: do not change the discussion of &lt;extent> in BPTL. Issue withdrawn.
 ===Issue 15===

@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 * Recommendation: propose this to the TEI Council as a feature request.
-* Hawkins will close the Issue.
+* Hawkins will close the Issue. [done but has reopened following further conversation]
 ===Issue 25===

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 ===Issue 5===
-* Bauman noted that there are actually 4 options: @key, @seeRef (though not available for all elements), tag URIs (RFC 4151), or private URI/prefixDef. Hawkins added @xml:base. They can be used in combination, as well: a short private URI can be created that expands to a tag URI.
+* Bauman noted that there are actually 4 options: @key, @seeRef (though not available for all elements), tag URIs (RFC 4151), or private URI schemes (creating a "prefix definition"). Hawkins added @xml:base. They can be used in combination, as well: a short private URI can be created that expands to a tag URI.
-* Bauman observed that tag URIs have advantage of being externally defined, and hence may be useful in other contexts, while private URI/prefixDef (http://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/Prefix_Definition_Proposal) is specific to TEI.
+* Bauman observed that tag URIs have advantage of being externally defined, and hence may be useful in other contexts, while [http://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/Prefix_Definition_Proposal private URI schemes (creating a "prefix definition")] is specific to TEI.
-* Recommendation: encoders should use tag URI instead of @key, but may use private URI/prefixDef if it better suits a project's needs, or if other URI schemes prove to be too cumbersome.
+* Recommendation: encoders should use tag URI instead of @key, but may use a private URI schemes (creating a "prefix definition") if it better suits a project's needs, or if other URI schemes prove to be too cumbersome.
 * Hawkins will update the ticket [done]