Tom Malcolmson wrote:
>My bibliography is currently in XHTML, edited using FrontPage. I have
>now started applying styles as semantic tags, eg. span.author,
>span.title (my tags correspond roughly to TEI tags). The styles are
>CSS styles: they can be nested and are inline when used with 'span'.
>This allows me to convert the document to TEI XML using a simple
>transformation (which I haven't written yet)
ah you reckon so? I have never felt confident of a 100% translation of HTML.
I always find it needs a 1% manual fix. No matter.
>Can anyone tell me when TEI P5 is expected to be complete?<br>
I may be speaking out of turn (and certainly not officially), but
I suspect you'll see P5 coming out as a phased release throughout the
first half of 2005. There is plenty to use already, but lots of chapters
need big revisions to the prose, several modules await overhauls, and
several new modules are in the wings. But switching to the P5 way of
may be a plausible step after Christmas. That's the attitude I'll try
the Board and Council towards, anyway.
The biggest question hanging over P5, I believe, is that of compatibility
with P4. As the move towards closer interoperability with W3C standards etc
bites deeper, and you find @lang --> @xml:lang, @id --> @xml:id, <TEI.2>
--> <TEI xmlns="......">, <ref target="foo"> --> <ref target="#foo">
all these as fixed decisions, some are unconfirmed), all your documents have
to change, and all your processing applications have to change. Will this
community get behind the changed TEI, or stay with the old system?
I am fairly sure that most people would agree the changes are intrinsically
correct and good, but I worry that in practice they'll say "great, but
_my_ documents, _now_".
ah well. thoughts on this from others very welcome. remember
its me speaking personally here, not speaking for the consortium!