This may be a really silly question, or a silly way of approaching the
topic, but as long as we're thinking things over I would like to get
the thoughts of the group on this:
To what extent does the TEI's successful functioning as an interchange
language depend on its vocabulary and the way it associates semantics
with specific terms, and to what extent does it depend on the specific
structures (i.e. where elements can go and what they can contain) that
are specified in the TEI schema?
In using the phrase "successful functioning" I don't mean to set aside
the debate about whether it *does* function successfully as an
interchange language--I'm really curious as to whether vocabulary or
grammar is really the key to whatever success we do attribute to, or
seek from, the TEI.
It seems to me that the answer to this question might affect how we
approach the problem of consistency and constraint. But I may be wrong
about this and I'd be glad to know more about it than I do.