I'm not sure a FAQ necessarily requires board-level intervention, and 
certainly not a board-developed proposal. Unless the people involved in 
this would like special approval, I'd have thought that the location and 
workflow was largely an operational matter that fell under the 
delegation already in place.

So while I'd be happy to present a proposal to the board if you wish, 
I'm pretty sure we'd all also be quite comfortable letting the people 
taking the lead on this decide the best way of dealing with it. In this 
case I guess David Sewell and/or James Cummings in their capacity as web 
people, Kevin who's been putting in the sweat equity, and anybody else 
who wants to work with them.

My vote would be for the Wiki, BTW. But that's not an ex cathedra statement!


On 10-08-10 07:23 PM, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
> Certainly a good idea, but I'll defer to the Board on whether they 
> want the FAQ to be community-driven or to state official answers.  If 
> I don't hear from them that they'd like to migrate this to the wiki 
> before I get around to working on this, I'll submit my revised FAQ to 
> the Board rather than straight to the TEI webmaster, who likely would 
> have sent it to them for approval rather than simply taking whatever I 
> sent him!  --Kevin
> stuart yeates wrote:
>> Maybe the best solution for this is for the FAQ link to point to a 
>> page in the wiki that can be updated by anyone in the community at 
>> their convenience rather than having to bother the webmaster?

Daniel Paul O'Donnell
Professor of English
University of Lethbridge

Chair and CEO, Text Encoding Initiative (
Co-Chair, Digital Initiatives Advisory Board, Medieval Academy of America
President-elect (English), Society for Digital Humanities/Société pour l'étude des médias interactifs (
Founding Director (2003-2009), Digital Medievalist Project (

Vox: +1 403 329-2377
Fax: +1 403 382-7191 (non-confidential)
Home Page: