> Peter Flynn writes:
> > that scope. The risk is therefore that some aspects of XML/XSL/etc
> > will become less easy to bind into the eventual XML version of the
> > full TEI if we are trying to adhere strictly to the standards.
> Peter, you raise this again about "XML version of the full TEI". Can
> *you* explain what aspects of TEI work you cannot do in XML, with
> the current system of deriving DTDs?
None, it works just fine. My reference to "the eventual XML version of
the full TEI) is based on my understanding (perhaps incorrect, but
based on the discussions at meetings in Glasgow last year) that the
TEI Consortium was working on an XML-valid full TEI DTD in the manner
that the original TEI was done.
> Is anyone on TEI-L genuinely waiting to use XML because of a
> perceived lack of XML support in TEI? if so, could they step up and
> explain the problem?
In my experience, many users expect to be able to download "the DTD"
(ie the full TEI DTD) in XML format in the same way as for the SGML,
so that they can experiment with it locally _in XML_, rather than
baking their own from the SGML master each time. The Pizza Chef and
the maketeidtd script are great, but not yet bug-free (report follows
in private mail :-), and many users are not up to running Perl scripts,
even though they have considerable facility with SGML, and in some cases
don't even have stable Web access.
> Are any of you being held up because you are waiting for TEI Schemas
> of some flavour, be they W3C, Relax, Trex, whatever?
No, but I'm sure I'll find a use for Schemas one day :-)
> As I remarked to Lou Burnard earlier today, I am probably unique on
> TEI-L in never having used TEI in its SGML incarnation, only in
You probably see things as "available" which others may not, because
of your experience and expertise. It's the absence of being able to
download "the DTD" in XML which I see as the stumbling-block for these