Difference between revisions of "SIGcorresp Minutes 20111015"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→DISCLAIMER:) |
Joachim Veit (talk | contribs) (first step of a few revisions and clarifications) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
* Elena Pierazzo (EP) | * Elena Pierazzo (EP) | ||
* Lou Burnard (LB) | * Lou Burnard (LB) | ||
| − | * Joachim Veit (JV) - | + | * Joachim Veit (JV) - convener |
* Martin de la Iglesia (MI) | * Martin de la Iglesia (MI) | ||
* Stefan Cramme (SC) | * Stefan Cramme (SC) | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
== Discussion <correspDesc> (or similar) == | == Discussion <correspDesc> (or similar) == | ||
| − | * current | + | * Sketch of the current situation: |
| − | ** DALF as P4 customization offers a lot of elements for letter description | + | ** DALF as P4 customization offers a lot of special elements for letter description |
| − | ** Peter Stadler had put a customization (ODD) into discussion on the SIG:s mailing list, allowing for a core | + | ** Peter Stadler had put a P5-customization (ODD) into discussion on the SIG:s mailing list, allowing for a core <corresDesc/> inside <tei:sourceDesc/> |
| − | * | + | * Meanwhile EV and RVB (KANTL) are mapping DALF to P5. In P5 many of the former P4 <dalf:letDesc/> elements had already been included in <tei:msDesc/>; nevertheless an inventory of the remaining additional correspondence elements which should be part of a correspondence specific customization would be very useful for further discussion. Mapping and ODDification of DALF-TEI could be completed by the end of the year |
| − | * Edvard Munch letters have been transcribed in perfect uncustomised TEI | + | * Edvard Munch letters have been transcribed in perfect uncustomised TEI, Hilde Boe should be asked if some examples may be published in the wiki for further discussion |
* in order to assist further discussion a comparison of these three shall be made; EV and RVB volunteered | * in order to assist further discussion a comparison of these three shall be made; EV and RVB volunteered | ||
| − | '''=> PRELIMINARY GOAL: | + | '''=> PRELIMINARY GOAL: Publish a comparison of the three solutions on the WiKi (and later anlarge this collection)''' |
| − | * EP brought forward that in aiming for a feature request in TEI one will have to take into account | + | * EP brought forward that in aiming for a feature request in TEI one will have to take into account: |
| − | ** the current discussion | + | ** the current discussion about tei:msDesc in the SIG:manuscripts: introducing a tboDesc (text bearing object) in order to address a greater amplitude of "manuscripts" |
| − | ** | + | ** the idea of forming a "superMetaSIG" in order to coordinate efforts in creating a "elephantDesc" (i.e. a common thing allowing for descriptions of as many textual sources as possible) |
| − | * FJ opted against starting with a "superSIG", before finishing | + | * FJ opted against starting with a "superSIG", before finishing this SIG:s work, as it is obvious that there will be no quick results, which would frustrate people |
* RVB put in that defining a small set of elements would be more convenient for further generalisation and integration | * RVB put in that defining a small set of elements would be more convenient for further generalisation and integration | ||
| − | * SB pointed out that in the end a tboDesc could be the right thing and | + | * SB pointed out that in the end a tboDesc could be the right thing and the SIG should try to feed in specific things |
| − | * | + | * Based on her experiences with the TEI-council EP suggests not to strive after "big things" because one has to consider that backwards compatibility always prevents too ambitious solutions; if the SIG goes that way things might be developed and then dropped |
| − | ** | + | ** As there will not be a modification of tei:msDesc EP recommends aiming for a customisation |
| − | * JV stated that as far as he understood, the wish for a subsetContainer for a very restricted | + | * JV stated that as far as he understood, the wish for a subsetContainer for a very restricted set of new correspondence elements has a consensus |
| − | '''=> MIDDLE-TERM GOAL: | + | '''=> MIDDLE-TERM GOAL: develop a proposal for "official" customizations''' |
== Discussion on future work == | == Discussion on future work == | ||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
* JV asked for a taskforce and definition of some future activities | * JV asked for a taskforce and definition of some future activities | ||
* RVDB hopes DALF will conclude their efforts in P5 mapping until the end of the year | * RVDB hopes DALF will conclude their efforts in P5 mapping until the end of the year | ||
| − | * FJ proposed a comparison of the two | + | * FJ proposed a comparison of the two currently discussed customizations and the P5-conformant encoding of the Munch Letters; EV (DALF/KANTL) volunteered on setting up the comparison |
| − | * JV | + | * JV asked for examples in order to point up the differences and supply other projects with some orientation and information for their work as early as possible |
** EV at the edition we started in march [PLEASES FILL IN THE URL] there you can see the XML | ** EV at the edition we started in march [PLEASES FILL IN THE URL] there you can see the XML | ||
| − | * EP prefers a tighter plan that could even result in a porposal for a TEI- | + | * EP prefers a tighter plan that could even result in a porposal for a TEI-microgrant |
** e.g. the purpose of two days will be: "we collect letters and put them in the WiKi" or similar; someone will have to coordinate especially if the grant will come out maybe next month | ** e.g. the purpose of two days will be: "we collect letters and put them in the WiKi" or similar; someone will have to coordinate especially if the grant will come out maybe next month | ||
* LB proposed a more complete overview of how to edit letters as one would have to be very careful not to think these 3 will cover everything; | * LB proposed a more complete overview of how to edit letters as one would have to be very careful not to think these 3 will cover everything; | ||
| Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
* EP clarified that it should be about a starting point first | * EP clarified that it should be about a starting point first | ||
* JV added as we are dependant on the SIG contributors, there is only a very small field of letters at the moment | * JV added as we are dependant on the SIG contributors, there is only a very small field of letters at the moment | ||
| − | ** EP modern, renaissance and medieval letters are completely different | + | ** EP: modern, renaissance and medieval letters are completely different |
| − | ** SB interested in | + | ** SB: interested in whether the TEI council will consider E-Mail as corresp or CMC (computer mediated communication) |
| − | *** EP the SIG has to define what they deal with | + | *** EP: the SIG has to define what they deal with |
| − | *** SB a guidance / thoughts from council will be interesting | + | *** SB: a guidance / thoughts from council will be interesting |
'''=> MIDDLE-TERM GOAL: collect examples and find out what people have done''' | '''=> MIDDLE-TERM GOAL: collect examples and find out what people have done''' | ||
| − | * JV: for TEI-by-example it's a bit too early but how can we help people | + | * JV: for TEI-by-example it's a bit too early but how can we help people who want to start with new editions? |
| − | * LB: give the 3 examples mentioned above, one has to figure out which is best for own purpose | + | * LB: give the 3 examples mentioned above, one has to figure out which is best for one's own purpose |
* JR's college is looking for a recommendation (editorial note: and certainly other projects as well) | * JR's college is looking for a recommendation (editorial note: and certainly other projects as well) | ||
* LB: you must make an intellectual deciscion | * LB: you must make an intellectual deciscion | ||
* EP: it's hard for the beginning; it's ultimately the rule to give something: "the best practice might be..." | * EP: it's hard for the beginning; it's ultimately the rule to give something: "the best practice might be..." | ||
| − | * JR would like to see recommendations because | + | * JR: would like to see recommendations because otherwise people might loose interest |
| − | * JV | + | * JV: There is a clear wish for cooperation between editors of correspondence and with common solutions this would be much easier |
* LB: first common ground is TEI; a meta-recommendation could be a second step | * LB: first common ground is TEI; a meta-recommendation could be a second step | ||
* FJ: common denominators work out of the box | * FJ: common denominators work out of the box | ||
| Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
* EP: sometimes you just want to do the thing everybody else does; I claim we should give guidance; there's nothing wrong with that | * EP: sometimes you just want to do the thing everybody else does; I claim we should give guidance; there's nothing wrong with that | ||
| − | '''=> MIDDLE-TERM GOAL: | + | '''=> MIDDLE-TERM GOAL: develop best practice models''' |
'''=> LONG-TERM GOAL: make a compressed proposal (EP)''' | '''=> LONG-TERM GOAL: make a compressed proposal (EP)''' | ||
| Line 88: | Line 88: | ||
== other proposals == | == other proposals == | ||
| − | * SB will try to sprousse up | + | * SB will try to sprousse up Peter's ODD to make it work with the TEI a little better |
| − | * SB proposed | + | * SB proposed to make the discussions more visible by taking part in conference calls |
== DISCLAIMER: == | == DISCLAIMER: == | ||
| − | If I got any of you wrong or | + | If I got any of you wrong or misspelled your names or anything else, please feel free to correct all of the above or contact me in order to do so --[[User:Bwbohl|Bwbohl]] 10:38, 20 October 2011 (EDT) |
Revision as of 00:16, 30 October 2011
Contents
Participants
- Fotis Jannidis (FJ)
- Syd Bauman (SB)
- Edward Vanhoutte (EV)
- Ron Van den Branden (RVB)
- Elena Pierazzo (EP)
- Lou Burnard (LB)
- Joachim Veit (JV) - convener
- Martin de la Iglesia (MI)
- Stefan Cramme (SC)
- Jörg Ritter (JR)
- Michael Huber (MH)
- Mareike Laue (ML)
- Sabine Seifert (SS)
- Raffaele Viglianti (RV)
- Sina Bock (SB)
- Anna Maria Komprecht (AMK)
- Benjamin Wolff Bohl (BWB) - minutes
- some more that came in late, feel free to enter your name
Introduction (JV)
- introduction of participants
- survey on the developement and history of the SIG and topics discussed so far
Discussion <correspDesc> (or similar)
- Sketch of the current situation:
- DALF as P4 customization offers a lot of special elements for letter description
- Peter Stadler had put a P5-customization (ODD) into discussion on the SIG:s mailing list, allowing for a core <corresDesc/> inside <tei:sourceDesc/>
- Meanwhile EV and RVB (KANTL) are mapping DALF to P5. In P5 many of the former P4 <dalf:letDesc/> elements had already been included in <tei:msDesc/>; nevertheless an inventory of the remaining additional correspondence elements which should be part of a correspondence specific customization would be very useful for further discussion. Mapping and ODDification of DALF-TEI could be completed by the end of the year
- Edvard Munch letters have been transcribed in perfect uncustomised TEI, Hilde Boe should be asked if some examples may be published in the wiki for further discussion
- in order to assist further discussion a comparison of these three shall be made; EV and RVB volunteered
=> PRELIMINARY GOAL: Publish a comparison of the three solutions on the WiKi (and later anlarge this collection)
- EP brought forward that in aiming for a feature request in TEI one will have to take into account:
- the current discussion about tei:msDesc in the SIG:manuscripts: introducing a tboDesc (text bearing object) in order to address a greater amplitude of "manuscripts"
- the idea of forming a "superMetaSIG" in order to coordinate efforts in creating a "elephantDesc" (i.e. a common thing allowing for descriptions of as many textual sources as possible)
- FJ opted against starting with a "superSIG", before finishing this SIG:s work, as it is obvious that there will be no quick results, which would frustrate people
- RVB put in that defining a small set of elements would be more convenient for further generalisation and integration
- SB pointed out that in the end a tboDesc could be the right thing and the SIG should try to feed in specific things
- Based on her experiences with the TEI-council EP suggests not to strive after "big things" because one has to consider that backwards compatibility always prevents too ambitious solutions; if the SIG goes that way things might be developed and then dropped
- As there will not be a modification of tei:msDesc EP recommends aiming for a customisation
- JV stated that as far as he understood, the wish for a subsetContainer for a very restricted set of new correspondence elements has a consensus
=> MIDDLE-TERM GOAL: develop a proposal for "official" customizations
Discussion on future work
- JV asked for a taskforce and definition of some future activities
- RVDB hopes DALF will conclude their efforts in P5 mapping until the end of the year
- FJ proposed a comparison of the two currently discussed customizations and the P5-conformant encoding of the Munch Letters; EV (DALF/KANTL) volunteered on setting up the comparison
- JV asked for examples in order to point up the differences and supply other projects with some orientation and information for their work as early as possible
- EV at the edition we started in march [PLEASES FILL IN THE URL] there you can see the XML
- EP prefers a tighter plan that could even result in a porposal for a TEI-microgrant
- e.g. the purpose of two days will be: "we collect letters and put them in the WiKi" or similar; someone will have to coordinate especially if the grant will come out maybe next month
- LB proposed a more complete overview of how to edit letters as one would have to be very careful not to think these 3 will cover everything;
- this would be wonderful but would need researchers and funding(EV)
- EP clarified that it should be about a starting point first
- JV added as we are dependant on the SIG contributors, there is only a very small field of letters at the moment
- EP: modern, renaissance and medieval letters are completely different
- SB: interested in whether the TEI council will consider E-Mail as corresp or CMC (computer mediated communication)
- EP: the SIG has to define what they deal with
- SB: a guidance / thoughts from council will be interesting
=> MIDDLE-TERM GOAL: collect examples and find out what people have done
- JV: for TEI-by-example it's a bit too early but how can we help people who want to start with new editions?
- LB: give the 3 examples mentioned above, one has to figure out which is best for one's own purpose
- JR's college is looking for a recommendation (editorial note: and certainly other projects as well)
- LB: you must make an intellectual deciscion
- EP: it's hard for the beginning; it's ultimately the rule to give something: "the best practice might be..."
- JR: would like to see recommendations because otherwise people might loose interest
- JV: There is a clear wish for cooperation between editors of correspondence and with common solutions this would be much easier
- LB: first common ground is TEI; a meta-recommendation could be a second step
- FJ: common denominators work out of the box
- EV: you will compromise yourself in using a set not fit for your purpose; designing your own encoding solution is your scholarly work
- EP: sometimes you just want to do the thing everybody else does; I claim we should give guidance; there's nothing wrong with that
=> MIDDLE-TERM GOAL: develop best practice models
=> LONG-TERM GOAL: make a compressed proposal (EP)
other proposals
- SB will try to sprousse up Peter's ODD to make it work with the TEI a little better
- SB proposed to make the discussions more visible by taking part in conference calls
DISCLAIMER:
If I got any of you wrong or misspelled your names or anything else, please feel free to correct all of the above or contact me in order to do so --Bwbohl 10:38, 20 October 2011 (EDT)
