I would say that from a PR point of view this is an undesirable position. We can't on the one hand argue that people should use TEI to be prepared for changes in the technology landscape and on the other hand relegate their documents to the dustbin of history if some changes actually happen.
The idea that only those documents that are technically TEI P5 conformant can count as TEI documents seems very restrictive to me.
Van: TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) public discussion list [[log in to unmask]] namens Lou Burnard [[log in to unmask]]
Verzonden: donderdag 21 november 2013 23:15
Aan: [log in to unmask]
Onderwerp: Re: [TEI-L] TEI Examples
The concept of "valid TEI document" was defined in TEI P5. P4 documents, though certainly "TEI" in some rather vague sense, cannot be considered valid by that definition.
They do of course remain valid TEI P4 documents -- except that I don't think there's any definition in TEI P4 of what exactly that might mean.
What's disappointing about that?
On 21/11/13 22:10, Stuart A. Yeates wrote:
Is it your contention that all valid P4 TEI documents became 'not TEI' overnight when P5 was released? That all documents that were once valid against the then-standard but are not valid against the current standard are 'not TEI' ?
I would be disappointed to see this being adopted as an official position.