Dear Sebastian,

On 8/23/2011 5:23 PM, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>> It's just that others, I hear, want
>> some confidence, on finding a TEI document in the wild, that they can
>> drop it into a TEI system and get decent results.
> It all comes down to the meaning of "in the wild", I suppose. If you pick
> a random document from my filestore whose name ends in .xml,
> and which starts<TEI, then yes, all bets are off. If you click on the
> "download 80%TEI version" on my website, or visit,
> then it's up to me to make sure that what I expose is interchangeable. I
> may also make available, of course.
> But we agree (golly, is that the first time?) on this.

I believe we have agreed in the past. But I'm not sure we could agree on 
when we have agreed, even if we could agree on having agreed at all.

> What bothers me about interchanging mixed namespace TEI XML
> is the tacit assumption if I meet<XXX xmlns=""><ZZZ>x</ZZZ><YYY>y</YYY>z</XXX>
> I can follow a reliable  procedure to ignore your markup which I don't grok.
> But what _is_ the algorithm there?

You have a point that mixed-namespace development on a small core would 
not solve the interchange problem in the general case. It might, 
however, address it for the core, while exposing it for the rest.

Currently, the capability for interchange is not only dependent on extra 
development cycles, but also (a) the work you have to perform is not 
trivial, (b) it is over and above the work you are already (over-) 
committed to doing just to design and support your application, and (c) 
there is often no good way even to detect where there is a need for it 
other than inspection and fine-toothed validation against sets of 
constraints that by definition are not shared by the community, or they 
wouldn't be at issue.

The fact that that the work could be done, or at least facilitated, by 
the publisher (who has a better understanding of local semantics), only 
makes this worse when the publisher doesn't do it, which is the usual 
case, since the onus is generally on the receiver to make it happen.

It's quite true that if you accept data marked up in my namespace, you 
are then at my mercy to document and perhaps help process the markup in 
a way I expect it to be processed. But presumably the TEI Consortium 
could refuse me the use of namespace 
"" until I demonstrated the 
utility and suitability of my nifty new tag set for others (maybe 
meeting a two-implementation requirement?), documented it to its 
standards with worked examples, and offered a dumbing-down 
transformation into 80% TEI to accommodate anyone who didn't want to 
support the tagging natively.


Wendell Piez                            mailto:[log in to unmask]
Mulberry Technologies, Inc.      
17 West Jefferson Street                    Direct Phone: 301/315-9635
Suite 207                                          Phone: 301/315-9631
Rockville, MD  20850                                 Fax: 301/315-8285
   Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML