User:Kshawkin/My Council obligations/Plan for TEI Tite - Revision history

Kshawkin: /* Next steps */ updated GitHub link based on new GitHub label

2015-12-19T17:41:33Z

Next steps: updated GitHub link based on new GitHub label

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:41, 19 December 2015
Line 57:		Line 57:
	b) In any order:		b) In any order:

	-- 1) See [https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/~~issues?q=is~~%~~3Aopen+is~~%~~3Aissue+label~~%~~3ATite~~ remaining issues].		-- 1) See [https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/labels/TEI%3A%20Schema%3A%20Tite remaining issues].

	: Kevin has fixed corrigible errors but then [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2014/020321.html emailed the Council for guidance on whether to proceed unilaterally]. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 00:55, 7 December 2014 (CET)) Council members suggested Kevin implement when he feels certain and seek guidance from Council when not.		: Kevin has fixed corrigible errors but then [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2014/020321.html emailed the Council for guidance on whether to proceed unilaterally]. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 00:55, 7 December 2014 (CET)) Council members suggested Kevin implement when he feels certain and seek guidance from Council when not.

Kshawkin: /* Next steps */ changed a SourceForge link to GitHub

2015-10-25T17:09:08Z

Next steps: changed a SourceForge link to GitHub

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:09, 25 October 2015
Line 57:		Line 57:
	b) In any order:		b) In any order:

	-- 1) See [~~http~~://~~sourceforge~~.~~net~~/p/~~tei~~/~~bugs/search~~?q=~~labels:%22Tite~~%~~22 the remaining bugs] and [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/search?q=labels:~~%~~22Tite~~%~~22 the~~ remaining ~~feature requests~~].		-- 1) See [https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3ATite remaining issues].

	: Kevin has fixed corrigible errors but then [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2014/020321.html emailed the Council for guidance on whether to proceed unilaterally]. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 00:55, 7 December 2014 (CET)) Council members suggested Kevin implement when he feels certain and seek guidance from Council when not.		: Kevin has fixed corrigible errors but then [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2014/020321.html emailed the Council for guidance on whether to proceed unilaterally]. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 00:55, 7 December 2014 (CET)) Council members suggested Kevin implement when he feels certain and seek guidance from Council when not.

Kshawkin: /* Background */ changed SourceForge link to GitHub

2015-10-25T17:04:08Z

Background: changed SourceForge link to GitHub

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:04, 25 October 2015
Line 3:		Line 3:
	[[TEI Tite]] was created as a result of a grant from the Mellon Foundation and given to the TEI-C to host in its repository along with other [http://www.tei-c.org/Guidelines/Customization/ customizations]. Since outside support for its maintenance has not been secured, maintenance fell to the TEI [[Technical Council]]. The Technical Council [http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/Council/Meetings/tcm52.xml#body.1_div.3_div.1_div.3 decided in September 2012 to maintain Tite, as it has long done for TEI Lite].		[[TEI Tite]] was created as a result of a grant from the Mellon Foundation and given to the TEI-C to host in its repository along with other [http://www.tei-c.org/Guidelines/Customization/ customizations]. Since outside support for its maintenance has not been secured, maintenance fell to the TEI [[Technical Council]]. The Technical Council [http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/Council/Meetings/tcm52.xml#body.1_div.3_div.1_div.3 decided in September 2012 to maintain Tite, as it has long done for TEI Lite].

	Those involved with setting up [http://www.tei-c.org/AccessTEI/ AccessTEI] agreed that Apex CoVantage would need a stable version of Tite to train staff on, so Apex forked the Tite spec to make some last-minute modifications to Tite before the launch of AccessTEI. It was always the intention to bring these revisions back into [https://~~sourceforge~~.~~net~~/p/~~tei~~/~~code~~/~~HEAD/tree/trunk~~/P5/Exemplars/tei_tite.odd the canonical Tite source managed by the TEI-C], and [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2010/012044.html in September 2010 the chair of the Technical Council appointed a task force to reconcile the two versions in use]. Greg Suprock at Apex confirmed on 2012-07-20 that Apex is willing to begin using a revised version provided by the TEI-C. [[User:Kshawkin\|Kevin Hawkins]] gathered the DTD used by Apex (hacked from a Tite DTD generated on 2010-03-02), which Virginia McClure sent to Dan O'Donnell in April 2010, and a summary of the changes, as reviewed by and approved by representatives of the TEI, to compare against the canonical one maintained by the TEI-C to see what revisions needed to be made in the canonical version to reconcile the two.		Those involved with setting up [http://www.tei-c.org/AccessTEI/ AccessTEI] agreed that Apex CoVantage would need a stable version of Tite to train staff on, so Apex forked the Tite spec to make some last-minute modifications to Tite before the launch of AccessTEI. It was always the intention to bring these revisions back into [https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/blob/master/P5/Exemplars/tei_tite.odd the canonical Tite source managed by the TEI-C], and [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2010/012044.html in September 2010 the chair of the Technical Council appointed a task force to reconcile the two versions in use]. Greg Suprock at Apex confirmed on 2012-07-20 that Apex is willing to begin using a revised version provided by the TEI-C. [[User:Kshawkin\|Kevin Hawkins]] gathered the DTD used by Apex (hacked from a Tite DTD generated on 2010-03-02), which Virginia McClure sent to Dan O'Donnell in April 2010, and a summary of the changes, as reviewed by and approved by representatives of the TEI, to compare against the canonical one maintained by the TEI-C to see what revisions needed to be made in the canonical version to reconcile the two.

	In later correspondence with Kevin, Greg sent Kevin the DTD that he said Apex was using as of 2012-04-17, which turned out to be derived from the version of Tite released with P5 1.7.0 (2010-07-06). However, it was missing <handShift/> and included <biblScope>, etc. even though these contradicted changes made to the Apex prose documentation for AccessTEI at some point after February 2010, when Apex summarized various suggested revisions to Tite to Perry Trolard and maybe others. Greg responded in an email to Kevin on 2012-08-08 that Apex was still using an older version of the DTD though had begun to review of a newer DTD (presumably the one that he had sent on 2012-04-17).		In later correspondence with Kevin, Greg sent Kevin the DTD that he said Apex was using as of 2012-04-17, which turned out to be derived from the version of Tite released with P5 1.7.0 (2010-07-06). However, it was missing <handShift/> and included <biblScope>, etc. even though these contradicted changes made to the Apex prose documentation for AccessTEI at some point after February 2010, when Apex summarized various suggested revisions to Tite to Perry Trolard and maybe others. Greg responded in an email to Kevin on 2012-08-08 that Apex was still using an older version of the DTD though had begun to review of a newer DTD (presumably the one that he had sent on 2012-04-17).

Kshawkin: /* Next steps */ Council's response on Kevin proceeding on his own; Apex pledges to update their schema

2015-01-08T19:55:24Z

Next steps: Council's response on Kevin proceeding on his own; Apex pledges to update their schema

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:55, 8 January 2015
Line 59:		Line 59:
	-- 1) See [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/search?q=labels:%22Tite%22 the remaining bugs] and [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/search?q=labels:%22Tite%22 the remaining feature requests].		-- 1) See [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/search?q=labels:%22Tite%22 the remaining bugs] and [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/search?q=labels:%22Tite%22 the remaining feature requests].

	: Kevin has fixed corrigible errors but then [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2014/020321.html emailed the Council for guidance on whether to proceed unilaterally]. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 00:55, 7 December 2014 (CET))		: Kevin has fixed corrigible errors but then [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2014/020321.html emailed the Council for guidance on whether to proceed unilaterally]. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 00:55, 7 December 2014 (CET)) Council members suggested Kevin implement when he feels certain and seek guidance from Council when not.

	-- 2) Rewrite Tite as an new-style inclusion ODD, as was done for Lite at [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/10700/ revision 10700] (not at revision 8777 as the commit comments would have you believe).		-- 2) Rewrite Tite as an new-style inclusion ODD, as was done for Lite at [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/10700/ revision 10700] (not at revision 8777 as the commit comments would have you believe).
Line 69:		Line 69:
	c) Notify Apex that the TEI-C has caught up on updating Tite and ask them to begin using the latest version.		c) Notify Apex that the TEI-C has caught up on updating Tite and ask them to begin using the latest version.

	: Kevin ~~has done this~~ on ~~2014~~-12-06. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 00:55, ~~7 December 2014~~ (CET))		: Ravi Thota at Apex wrote to Kevin on 2015-01-04 to say they would look at https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/P5/Exemplars/tei_tite.odd but wait for the next P5 release before changing the schema they use. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 20:55, 8 January 2015 (CET))

	[[Category:Council]]		[[Category:Council]]

Kshawkin: /* Next steps */ step b.2 is done

2014-12-07T19:40:28Z

Next steps: step b.2 is done

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:40, 7 December 2014
Line 64:		Line 64:

	: Or was this already done at [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/8764/ revision 8764] (aside from all the whitespace changes)? ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 22:24, 19 November 2014 (CET))		: Or was this already done at [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/8764/ revision 8764] (aside from all the whitespace changes)? ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 22:24, 19 November 2014 (CET))

			:: Martin Holmes emailed tei-council to say that Tite is now an inclusion-style ODD (the new style). ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 20:40, 7 December 2014 (CET))

	c) Notify Apex that the TEI-C has caught up on updating Tite and ask them to begin using the latest version.		c) Notify Apex that the TEI-C has caught up on updating Tite and ask them to begin using the latest version.

Kshawkin: /* Next steps */ emailed Council to ask how to proceed on implementing tickets

2014-12-06T23:55:58Z

Next steps: emailed Council to ask how to proceed on implementing tickets

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:55, 6 December 2014
Line 58:		Line 58:

	-- 1) See [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/search?q=labels:%22Tite%22 the remaining bugs] and [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/search?q=labels:%22Tite%22 the remaining feature requests].		-- 1) See [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/search?q=labels:%22Tite%22 the remaining bugs] and [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/feature-requests/search?q=labels:%22Tite%22 the remaining feature requests].

			: Kevin has fixed corrigible errors but then [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2014/020321.html emailed the Council for guidance on whether to proceed unilaterally]. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 00:55, 7 December 2014 (CET))

	-- 2) Rewrite Tite as an new-style inclusion ODD, as was done for Lite at [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/10700/ revision 10700] (not at revision 8777 as the commit comments would have you believe).		-- 2) Rewrite Tite as an new-style inclusion ODD, as was done for Lite at [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/10700/ revision 10700] (not at revision 8777 as the commit comments would have you believe).
Line 64:		Line 66:

	c) Notify Apex that the TEI-C has caught up on updating Tite and ask them to begin using the latest version.		c) Notify Apex that the TEI-C has caught up on updating Tite and ask them to begin using the latest version.

			: Kevin has done this on 2014-12-06. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 00:55, 7 December 2014 (CET))

	[[Category:Council]]		[[Category:Council]]

Kshawkin: /* Next steps */ Apex doesn't need @from and @to on

2014-12-04T00:34:08Z

Next steps: Apex doesn't need @from and @to on <time>

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:34, 4 December 2014
Line 52:		Line 52:

	: Kevin has reviewed his printout more carefully. It seems that all changes have been accounted for except that Apex's version includes @from and @to on <code>time</code> despite our notes from them saying that it was note needed (see [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/247/ bug 3136934 (old system) / 247 (new system)]). Kevin will inquire with Apex on whether they really meant to keep these in. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 05:08, 14 November 2014 (CET)) Kevin just emailed Apex to inquire. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 19:41, 23 November 2014 (CET))		: Kevin has reviewed his printout more carefully. It seems that all changes have been accounted for except that Apex's version includes @from and @to on <code>time</code> despite our notes from them saying that it was note needed (see [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/247/ bug 3136934 (old system) / 247 (new system)]). Kevin will inquire with Apex on whether they really meant to keep these in. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 05:08, 14 November 2014 (CET)) Kevin just emailed Apex to inquire. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 19:41, 23 November 2014 (CET))

			:: Ravi at Apex emailed Kevin on 2014-12-03 to say that they do not need @from and @to on <code>time</code>. So the canonical version of Tite should now include everything that Apex needs. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 01:34, 4 December 2014 (CET))

	b) In any order:		b) In any order:

Kshawkin: /* Next steps */ noted that I've emailed Apex to ask about @from and @to on

2014-11-23T18:41:29Z

Next steps: noted that I've emailed Apex to ask about @from and @to on <time>

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:41, 23 November 2014
Line 51:		Line 51:
	a) Compare Apex's DTD generated on 2010-03-02 (and not the later one they sent) against Tite from P5 1.6.0 (the closest version) for differences that can't be accounted for simply by changes to P5 (and would indicate other revisions from Apex that we should consider for canonical Tite). One could use NekoDTD or DtdAnalyzer if the diff function in <oXygen/> isn't sufficient. Kevin began this work (the "printout" mentioned above) and will pick it up; simultaneously, Syd will use a DTD comparison tool or two to check the files in an automated fashion.		a) Compare Apex's DTD generated on 2010-03-02 (and not the later one they sent) against Tite from P5 1.6.0 (the closest version) for differences that can't be accounted for simply by changes to P5 (and would indicate other revisions from Apex that we should consider for canonical Tite). One could use NekoDTD or DtdAnalyzer if the diff function in <oXygen/> isn't sufficient. Kevin began this work (the "printout" mentioned above) and will pick it up; simultaneously, Syd will use a DTD comparison tool or two to check the files in an automated fashion.

	: Kevin has reviewed his printout more carefully. It seems that all changes have been accounted for except that Apex's version includes @from and @to on <code>time</code> despite our notes from them saying that it was note needed (see [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/247/ bug 3136934 (old system) / 247 (new system)]). Kevin will inquire with Apex on whether they really meant to keep these in. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 05:08, 14 November 2014 (CET))		: Kevin has reviewed his printout more carefully. It seems that all changes have been accounted for except that Apex's version includes @from and @to on <code>time</code> despite our notes from them saying that it was note needed (see [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/247/ bug 3136934 (old system) / 247 (new system)]). Kevin will inquire with Apex on whether they really meant to keep these in. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 05:08, 14 November 2014 (CET)) Kevin just emailed Apex to inquire. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 19:41, 23 November 2014 (CET))

	b) In any order:		b) In any order:

Kshawkin: more clarification of Apex versions

2014-11-23T18:23:15Z

more clarification of Apex versions

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:23, 23 November 2014
Line 3:		Line 3:
	[[TEI Tite]] was created as a result of a grant from the Mellon Foundation and given to the TEI-C to host in its repository along with other [http://www.tei-c.org/Guidelines/Customization/ customizations]. Since outside support for its maintenance has not been secured, maintenance fell to the TEI [[Technical Council]]. The Technical Council [http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/Council/Meetings/tcm52.xml#body.1_div.3_div.1_div.3 decided in September 2012 to maintain Tite, as it has long done for TEI Lite].		[[TEI Tite]] was created as a result of a grant from the Mellon Foundation and given to the TEI-C to host in its repository along with other [http://www.tei-c.org/Guidelines/Customization/ customizations]. Since outside support for its maintenance has not been secured, maintenance fell to the TEI [[Technical Council]]. The Technical Council [http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/Council/Meetings/tcm52.xml#body.1_div.3_div.1_div.3 decided in September 2012 to maintain Tite, as it has long done for TEI Lite].

	Those involved with setting up [http://www.tei-c.org/AccessTEI/ AccessTEI] agreed that Apex CoVantage would need a stable version of Tite to train staff on, so Apex forked the Tite spec to make some last-minute modifications to Tite before the launch of AccessTEI. It was always the intention to bring these revisions back into [https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/P5/Exemplars/tei_tite.odd the canonical Tite source managed by the TEI-C], and [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2010/012044.html in September 2010 the chair of the Technical Council appointed a task force to reconcile the two versions in use]. Greg Suprock at Apex confirmed on 2012-07-20 that Apex is willing to begin using a revised version provided by the TEI-C. [[User:Kshawkin\|Kevin Hawkins]] gathered the DTD used by Apex (hacked from ~~the~~ Tite DTD ~~included in P5 1.6.0~~), which Virginia McClure sent to Dan O'Donnell in April 2010, and a summary of the changes, as reviewed by and approved by representatives of the TEI, to compare against the canonical one maintained by the TEI-C to see what revisions needed to be made in the canonical version to reconcile the two.		Those involved with setting up [http://www.tei-c.org/AccessTEI/ AccessTEI] agreed that Apex CoVantage would need a stable version of Tite to train staff on, so Apex forked the Tite spec to make some last-minute modifications to Tite before the launch of AccessTEI. It was always the intention to bring these revisions back into [https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/P5/Exemplars/tei_tite.odd the canonical Tite source managed by the TEI-C], and [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2010/012044.html in September 2010 the chair of the Technical Council appointed a task force to reconcile the two versions in use]. Greg Suprock at Apex confirmed on 2012-07-20 that Apex is willing to begin using a revised version provided by the TEI-C. [[User:Kshawkin\|Kevin Hawkins]] gathered the DTD used by Apex (hacked from a Tite DTD generated on 2010-03-02), which Virginia McClure sent to Dan O'Donnell in April 2010, and a summary of the changes, as reviewed by and approved by representatives of the TEI, to compare against the canonical one maintained by the TEI-C to see what revisions needed to be made in the canonical version to reconcile the two.

	In later correspondence with Kevin, Greg sent Kevin the DTD that he said Apex was using as of 2012-04-17, which turned out to be derived from the version of Tite released with P5 1.7.0 (2010-07-06). However, it was missing <handShift/> and included <biblScope>, etc. even though these contradicted changes made to the Apex prose documentation for AccessTEI at some point after February 2010, when Apex summarized various suggested revisions to Tite to Perry Trolard and maybe others. Greg responded in an email to Kevin on 2012-08-08 that Apex was still using an older version of the DTD though had begun to review of a newer DTD (presumably the one that he had sent on 2012-04-17).		In later correspondence with Kevin, Greg sent Kevin the DTD that he said Apex was using as of 2012-04-17, which turned out to be derived from the version of Tite released with P5 1.7.0 (2010-07-06). However, it was missing <handShift/> and included <biblScope>, etc. even though these contradicted changes made to the Apex prose documentation for AccessTEI at some point after February 2010, when Apex summarized various suggested revisions to Tite to Perry Trolard and maybe others. Greg responded in an email to Kevin on 2012-08-08 that Apex was still using an older version of the DTD though had begun to review of a newer DTD (presumably the one that he had sent on 2012-04-17).
Line 36:		Line 36:
	In June 2012 [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2012/015829.html Sebastian ran a comparison of the 2012-04-17 file against P5 1.7.0]. I now realize that what he reported as (b) in his message is simply the result of [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/9883/ revision 9883].		In June 2012 [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2012/015829.html Sebastian ran a comparison of the 2012-04-17 file against P5 1.7.0]. I now realize that what he reported as (b) in his message is simply the result of [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/9883/ revision 9883].

	Then in July 2012(?) Kevin diff'd the Apex DTD ~~based~~ on ~~Tite from P5 1.6.0~~ against Tite from P5 1.6.0, writing annotations on a printout.		Then in July 2012(?) Kevin diff'd the Apex DTD generated on 2010-03-02 against Tite from P5 1.6.0 (the closest version), writing annotations on a printout.

	b) A few of these tickets have have already been implemented:		b) A few of these tickets have have already been implemented:
Line 49:		Line 49:
	== Next steps ==		== Next steps ==

	a) Compare Apex's DTD ~~from based~~ on ~~Tite from P5 1.6.0~~ (and not the later one they sent) against Tite from P5 1.6.0 for differences that can't be accounted for simply by changes to P5 (and would indicate other revisions from Apex that we should consider for canonical Tite). One could use NekoDTD or DtdAnalyzer if the diff function in <oXygen/> isn't sufficient. Kevin began this work (the "printout" mentioned above) and will pick it up; simultaneously, Syd will use a DTD comparison tool or two to check the files in an automated fashion.		a) Compare Apex's DTD generated on 2010-03-02 (and not the later one they sent) against Tite from P5 1.6.0 (the closest version) for differences that can't be accounted for simply by changes to P5 (and would indicate other revisions from Apex that we should consider for canonical Tite). One could use NekoDTD or DtdAnalyzer if the diff function in <oXygen/> isn't sufficient. Kevin began this work (the "printout" mentioned above) and will pick it up; simultaneously, Syd will use a DTD comparison tool or two to check the files in an automated fashion.

	: Kevin has reviewed his printout more carefully. It seems that all changes have been accounted for except that Apex's version includes @from and @to on <code>time</code> despite our notes from them saying that it was note needed (see [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/247/ bug 3136934 (old system) / 247 (new system)]). Kevin will inquire with Apex on whether they really meant to keep these in. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 05:08, 14 November 2014 (CET))		: Kevin has reviewed his printout more carefully. It seems that all changes have been accounted for except that Apex's version includes @from and @to on <code>time</code> despite our notes from them saying that it was note needed (see [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/247/ bug 3136934 (old system) / 247 (new system)]). Kevin will inquire with Apex on whether they really meant to keep these in. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 05:08, 14 November 2014 (CET))

Kshawkin: clarified versions of the Apex DTD

2014-11-23T18:19:04Z

clarified versions of the Apex DTD

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:19, 23 November 2014
Line 3:		Line 3:
	[[TEI Tite]] was created as a result of a grant from the Mellon Foundation and given to the TEI-C to host in its repository along with other [http://www.tei-c.org/Guidelines/Customization/ customizations]. Since outside support for its maintenance has not been secured, maintenance fell to the TEI [[Technical Council]]. The Technical Council [http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/Council/Meetings/tcm52.xml#body.1_div.3_div.1_div.3 decided in September 2012 to maintain Tite, as it has long done for TEI Lite].		[[TEI Tite]] was created as a result of a grant from the Mellon Foundation and given to the TEI-C to host in its repository along with other [http://www.tei-c.org/Guidelines/Customization/ customizations]. Since outside support for its maintenance has not been secured, maintenance fell to the TEI [[Technical Council]]. The Technical Council [http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/Council/Meetings/tcm52.xml#body.1_div.3_div.1_div.3 decided in September 2012 to maintain Tite, as it has long done for TEI Lite].

	Those involved with setting up [http://www.tei-c.org/AccessTEI/ AccessTEI] agreed that Apex CoVantage would need a stable version of Tite to train staff on, so Apex forked the Tite spec to make some last-minute modifications to Tite before the launch of AccessTEI. It was always the intention to bring these revisions back into [https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/P5/Exemplars/tei_tite.odd the canonical Tite source managed by the TEI-C], and [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2010/012044.html in September 2010 the chair of the Technical Council appointed a task force to reconcile the two versions in use]. Greg Suprock at Apex confirmed on 2012-07-20 that Apex is willing to begin using a revised version provided by the TEI-C. [[User:Kshawkin\|Kevin Hawkins]] gathered the DTD used by Apex (~~generated 2010-03-02~~, which Virginia McClure sent to Dan O'Donnell in April 2010) and a summary of the changes, as reviewed by and approved by representatives of the TEI, to compare against the canonical one maintained by the TEI-C to see what revisions needed to be made in the canonical version to reconcile the two.		Those involved with setting up [http://www.tei-c.org/AccessTEI/ AccessTEI] agreed that Apex CoVantage would need a stable version of Tite to train staff on, so Apex forked the Tite spec to make some last-minute modifications to Tite before the launch of AccessTEI. It was always the intention to bring these revisions back into [https://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/P5/Exemplars/tei_tite.odd the canonical Tite source managed by the TEI-C], and [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2010/012044.html in September 2010 the chair of the Technical Council appointed a task force to reconcile the two versions in use]. Greg Suprock at Apex confirmed on 2012-07-20 that Apex is willing to begin using a revised version provided by the TEI-C. [[User:Kshawkin\|Kevin Hawkins]] gathered the DTD used by Apex (hacked from the Tite DTD included in P5 1.6.0), which Virginia McClure sent to Dan O'Donnell in April 2010, and a summary of the changes, as reviewed by and approved by representatives of the TEI, to compare against the canonical one maintained by the TEI-C to see what revisions needed to be made in the canonical version to reconcile the two.

	In later correspondence with Kevin, Greg sent Kevin the DTD that he said Apex was using as of 2012-04-17, which turned out to be derived from the version of Tite released with P5 1.7.0 (2010-07-06). However, it was missing <handShift/> and included <biblScope>, etc. even though these contradicted changes made to the Apex prose documentation for AccessTEI at some point after February 2010, when Apex summarized various suggested revisions to Tite to Perry Trolard and maybe others. Greg responded in an email to Kevin on 2012-08-08 that Apex was still using an older version of the DTD though had begun to review of a newer DTD (presumably the one that he had sent on 2012-04-17).		In later correspondence with Kevin, Greg sent Kevin the DTD that he said Apex was using as of 2012-04-17, which turned out to be derived from the version of Tite released with P5 1.7.0 (2010-07-06). However, it was missing <handShift/> and included <biblScope>, etc. even though these contradicted changes made to the Apex prose documentation for AccessTEI at some point after February 2010, when Apex summarized various suggested revisions to Tite to Perry Trolard and maybe others. Greg responded in an email to Kevin on 2012-08-08 that Apex was still using an older version of the DTD though had begun to review of a newer DTD (presumably the one that he had sent on 2012-04-17).
Line 36:		Line 36:
	In June 2012 [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2012/015829.html Sebastian ran a comparison of the 2012-04-17 file against P5 1.7.0]. I now realize that what he reported as (b) in his message is simply the result of [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/9883/ revision 9883].		In June 2012 [http://lists.village.virginia.edu/pipermail/tei-council/2012/015829.html Sebastian ran a comparison of the 2012-04-17 file against P5 1.7.0]. I now realize that what he reported as (b) in his message is simply the result of [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/code/9883/ revision 9883].

	Then in July 2012(?) Kevin diff'd the Apex DTD from ~~2010-03-02~~ against Tite from P5 1.6.0, writing annotations on a printout.		Then in July 2012(?) Kevin diff'd the Apex DTD based on Tite from P5 1.6.0 against Tite from P5 1.6.0, writing annotations on a printout.

	b) A few of these tickets have have already been implemented:		b) A few of these tickets have have already been implemented:
Line 49:		Line 49:
	== Next steps ==		== Next steps ==

	a) Compare Apex's DTD from ~~2010-03-02~~ (and not ~~2012-04-17!~~) against Tite from P5 1.6.0 for differences that can't be accounted for simply by changes to P5 (and would indicate other revisions from Apex that we should consider for canonical Tite). One could use NekoDTD or DtdAnalyzer if the diff function in <oXygen/> isn't sufficient. Kevin began this work (the "printout" mentioned above) and will pick it up; simultaneously, Syd will use a DTD comparison tool or two to check the files in an automated fashion.		a) Compare Apex's DTD from based on Tite from P5 1.6.0 (and not the later one they sent) against Tite from P5 1.6.0 for differences that can't be accounted for simply by changes to P5 (and would indicate other revisions from Apex that we should consider for canonical Tite). One could use NekoDTD or DtdAnalyzer if the diff function in <oXygen/> isn't sufficient. Kevin began this work (the "printout" mentioned above) and will pick it up; simultaneously, Syd will use a DTD comparison tool or two to check the files in an automated fashion.

	: Kevin has reviewed his printout more carefully. It seems that all changes have been accounted for except that Apex's version includes @from and @to on <code>time</code> despite our notes from them saying that it was note needed (see [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/247/ bug 3136934 (old system) / 247 (new system)]). Kevin will inquire with Apex on whether they really meant to keep these in. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 05:08, 14 November 2014 (CET))		: Kevin has reviewed his printout more carefully. It seems that all changes have been accounted for except that Apex's version includes @from and @to on <code>time</code> despite our notes from them saying that it was note needed (see [http://sourceforge.net/p/tei/bugs/247/ bug 3136934 (old system) / 247 (new system)]). Kevin will inquire with Apex on whether they really meant to keep these in. ([[User:Kshawkin\|Kshawkin]] 05:08, 14 November 2014 (CET))