Martin has pointed out the quintessential hole in Sebastian's
(excellent) idea. Unless we bring back TEIform= (which I am *not*
suggesting), it's actually going to be difficult to find agreement on
how to represent the concept "this is a <tei:name type='person'> that
in tei_all would have been a <tei:persName type='laborer'
Sadly, I don't think even the <equiv> mechanism is up to this task,
but that seems like the sort of route to take.
> > more generally, it's a truism that "with<div>,<ab> and<seg> I can
> > mark up anything", but reducing the whole TEI set to those three
> > seems to go too far...
> I think that would clearly be too far -- I see no reason to exclude
> <head>, <p> and many others.
Not just too far, *way* too far. *Ridiculously* too far. "May as well
all switch to microformats" too far. Wendell in his Balisage paper
this year calls these methods "escape hatches". He argues that in
some measure these are not just useful, but important. And I agree.
But if you design your ship with nothing but escape hatches -- no
planks, no cargo holds, no bridge, no sails, no engine -- you're not
going to get very far.