Joshua Hutchinson wrote:
> On 3/6/07, Julia Flanders <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Since I don't know very much about Jon's project, it's hard for me to
>> say at this point whether the semantic nuance he asks about is
>> pointless, essential, or somewhere in between, but it's certainly an
>> interesting area to explore.
> I'd hazard that Jon's question was prompted (at least in large part)
> due to conversations we've been having about Project Gutenberg's
> efforts to switch to a TEI-based master encoding.
> So, knowing that our "markup editors" will be volunteers coming from a
> largely book-loving background and not a scholarly background (and
> hence tend to think in terms of layout vs in terms of semantics), how
> would you approach this type of issue? ie, How strictly would you
> like to see PG stick to "semantic markup only" philosophy? Where is
> the balance between ease of markup and good strict practices?
If they're going to use TEI, then they should do it properly. Otherwise,
let 'em stick with HTML, and save both the temporary labor of converting
to TEI and the permanent hardware overhead of converting back again on
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"