In message <[log in to unmask]> Peter Boot
<[log in to unmask]> writes:
> Three minor issues with P5 (based on the Guidelines at
> 1. The definitions of ptr and ref still mention 'location in the current
> document'. I am under the impression that we're going to use ptr and ref
> to point to external locations too. Is that correct?
That is correct. I will correct the discussion in CO asap
> 2. The definition of data.language
> (http://www.tei-c.org/P5/Guidelines/ref-data.language.html) refers to RFC
> 1766, while the definition of xml:lang
> (http://www.tei-c.org/P5/Guidelines/ref-att.global.html) mentions RFC
One of them is wrong! I will find out and fix the other one...
> 3. the language element for describing languages in the document does not
> seem to be mandatory (http://www.tei-c.org/P5/Guidelines/HD.html#HD41: 'A
> <language> element may be supplied for each different language used in a
> document'); which seems sensible, as the values of xml:lang will usually
> be unambiguously clear. However, the definition of the mainLang and
> ontherLangs attributes of the textLang element state they must refer to 'a
> code identifying a <language> element in the header'. Is that intentional
> or just an oversight?
It is an oversight. As you rightly say, if the code used is unambiguous there is
no need to specify a <language> element
Many thanks for the careful reading! This is a particularly good time to report
errors, as we are hoping to get a new release version out in the next couple of