HI Amy,

> Would I be correct in stating that the 2 most generic schema out of
> those I mentioned in my OP include TEI and XHTML?

I think that would be fair to say. As Sebastian suggests, the XHTML is 
really a digital publication format, although it's arguable that in 
recent years, particularly with HTML5, it's been moving more in the 
direction of providing abstract document structure modelling in place of 
rendering functionality (i.e. less emphasis on <i/>, <b/>, <u/> and more 
of the <section/>, <header/>, <cite/> sort of thing).


On 15-08-05 12:49 AM, Amy Mack wrote:
> @ Martin
> [quote]You've clearly done a huge amount of homework before asking
> this question![/quote]
> Am feeling like there is so much homework still to do! I really want
> to limit the cost and wasted time of heading down the wrong path.
> It is also clear to me that I have plenty more work to do to better
> understand how to make use of multiple schema. Perhaps the subject
> of a future post.
> [quote]...the single biggest advantage of using TEI as a base format
> in a scenario such as the one you outline is that it covers a huge
> range of use-cases.[/quote]
> The main factors that initially drew me to TEI include:
> - open, non-proprietary schema (I originally came across Scribe -
> ScML - and went looking for an "open source" alternative) - deep
> history and community involvement/vibrancy (there is obviously an
> enormous amount of intellectual capital amongst the TEI community
> when it comes to markup and text encoding) - access to relevant
> tools (generally a function of the above 2 factors)
> A quick review of the guidelines showed the breadth of the schema.
> As you have noted, although the TEI's history is linked to
> humanities, and many schema offer to ability to extend the schema,
> the standard schema cover many use cases and embedding additional
> namespaces adds even more.
> [quote]TEI ... is ready to handle everything[/quote]
> This is consistent with my thinking that the base format must be one
> of the more generic schema capable of handling many document types
> either natively or by being extended/customized/specialized - ie one
> that provides core components such as metadata and structure,
> alongside which other, more specialized modules can be added.
> It is also one of the main reasons why I am considering TEI as one
> of the options to use as the base format. It seems like a fairly
> obvious choice, although the OP was aimed at helping me (and others)
> consider other viable alternatives and the factors involved in making
> that choice.
> Would I be correct in stating that the 2 most generic schema out of
> those I mentioned in my OP include TEI and XHTML?