On Mon, 2006-29-05 at 12:57 -0700, Martin Holmes wrote:
Good enough. But then perhaps last saved doesn't belong here either?
I.e. It sounds like this is a storage for information about machines
rather than actions. Last saved would also be recoverable from the
revision history (or the file date). And including it implies that the
tool was used that once... or at least it privileges the last usage.
Perhaps this is really like the old Language declarations.
> My gut feeling is that this would be overkill. The app itself can only
> know when it saved the file; it can't really know what the user's
> purpose was in working on the file that day. The user does know that
> info, and if it's important, it can go into the teiHeader in the usual
> way as part of the revision description; in the IMT, you can edit the
> teiHeader as text inside the program, and I think most tools would allow
> this sort of thing. "Last saved date" is a mechanical thing, whereas
> revision descriptions are intellectual content best left to humans. If
> each app which worked on a file left its "last saved" date in its
> creatorApp tag, an app such as IMT might be able to provide useful
> diagnostic feedback in the event of (say) failure to open a file --
> something like this:
> "Since this file was last opened in the Image Markup Tool (25/05/06), it
> has been edited using Joe's Universal TEI Editor (27/05/06), at which
> time key data relating to annotation categories appears to have been
> deleted. The Image Markup Tool is no longer able to open this file
> normally. Would you like to attempt reconstruction of the missing data?"
> (Not that my app has anything that clever in it at the moment ;-) But if
> we had a standardized creatorApp module, that sort of thing would be
Daniel Paul O'Donnell
Associate Professor and Chair of English
Director, Digital Medievalist Project
University of Lethbridge
Lethbridge AB T1K 3M4
Vox +1 403 329-2377
Fax +1 403 382-7191