Print

Print


Le 1 sept. 04, à 16:59, Lou Burnard a écrit :

>
>>
>> But I'm ignorant about the current state of the developments aimed at
>> making P5 seriously usable for term-banks (as distinct from the rather
>> limited possibilities of the P4 Ch 12 "Print dictionaries")  Is the
>> (re?)location of "term" (e.g. its putative migration away from the
>> core)
>> somehow tied in with these developments?  In which case there might be
>> larger implications here  that the terminologists could comment on.
>
>
> No no, again, <term> is staying where it is. I will leave it to Laurent
> to comment on what's planned for TEI P5 wrt Dictionaries and
> Terminology.


I would make the proposal to completely reshuffle the 'old' Terminology
chapter and introduce in P5 a representation model that would: a) be
conformant to the reference ISO standard in this domain (i.e. ISO 16642
- Terminology Markup Framework) and b) apply the basic syntax of TBX
(which is the XML format recommended by the localisation industry (see
www.lisa.org) and already conformant to ISO 16642. I would just limit
the description of such a terminology format to a subset that represent
the main features needed in a terminology databank in the kind of
applications we have to deal with in the TEI community and make
explicit how the new ODD extension mechanism can help people expand
this core.
Would all the community be happy with this? Should I put some manpower
on this?
Laurent