Via: UK.AC.EARN-RELAY; Thu, 4 Jun 92 17:49 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 3267; Thu, 04 Jun 92 17:43:39 BST Received: from UICVM by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9077; Thu, 04 Jun 92 17:43:33 BST Received: from UICVM.BITNET by UICVM (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 3418; Thu, 04 Jun 92 11:27:41 CD Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1992 11:24:59 CDT Reply-To: "TEISteer: Text Encoding Initiative Steering Committee List" , "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" Sender: "TEISteer: Text Encoding Initiative Steering Committee List" From: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" Subject: sc m25, minutes of Chicago meeting To: Multiple recipients of list TEISTEER I append the draft minutes of the meeting held last Friday and Monday. Corrections requested (post to list). -CMSMcQ ---- TEI SC M25 ---- Minutes of the TEI Steering Committee Meeting Chicago, 29 May and 1 June 1992 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen TEI SC M25 3 June 1992 1 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Present: Robert Amsler (RA), Lou Burnard (LB), Susan Hockey (SH), C. M. Sperberg-McQueen (MSM), Donald Walker (DW), Antonio Zampolli (AZ) (2 June 1992). AZ was absent on Friday, 29 May 1992. NI was absent during portions of Monday, 1 June 1992. 2 MINUTES TEI SC M23 and M24 were approved as submitted. 3 MATTERS ARISING SH continues to investigate acquiring an ISBN for the Guidelines; she will contact the Library of Congress in hopes of finding more informa- tion. ACTION: SH to acquire an ISBN for TEI P2. Due: asap NI reported that the NEH has extended to the current grant to the end of June 1993, extending the matching fund deadline to the end of March 1993. MSM expects to prepare a new budget for the extended period. ACTION: MSM to prepare a new budget for NEH grant. Due: asap Extension of Mellon funds; DW asked whether the project should count Mellon funds as expended and keep the NEH funds. DW said he needed an accounting of funds expended in order to ask for an extension. MSM will prepare the accounting, and DW will ask for the extension. ACTION: MSM to prepare accounting of Mellon funds. Due: asap ACTION: DW to request extension from Mellon. Due: asap NI reported no progress on her paper on software evaluation. The action to her was extended. ACTION: NI to draft a paper on software evaluation as a possible activity for the transitional period of TEI activity, expanding on the rel- evant section of SC W3. Due: asap Document number: SC W4 SH had sent no detailed information to the WGs on the new schedule owing to uncertainty about exactly what we still want from them. The steering committee needed, she thought, to make very clear during the technical review meeting what help we can use from them, and to distin- guish clearly completed work from ongoing work which will not go into P2 or possibly even P3. 4 SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION OF P2 MSM reviewed the status of each chapter: 11: ready for publication 12: not drafted 13: outlined 21: drafted 22: drafted 23: drafted 31: no draft 32: no draft 33: WG draft needs work 34: published 35: no draft 36: WG has promised a suitable draft 37: no draft 38: WG draft 39: no draft 41: WG draft needs work 42: WG draft needs work 43: no draft 44: status unclear 45: partial drafts 46: no draft 47: WG draft 51: no draft 52: DTD drafted, P1 53: WG draft (Simons) 54: no draft 61: WG draft (ML W43) 62: no draft 63: outlined 64: partial WG draft (ML W43) 7: generated from chapters 81: generated from chapters 82: WG drafts 83: WG draft (Simons) 84: no draft 85: ready for publication SH asked for suggestions on how to finish the document. If the remaining chapters are approximately the same size as those prepared thus far, P2 seems likely to comprise 1000 pages of prose and 1000 pages of reference material. More detailed consideration led to another rough estimate of 600 pages of prose. RA suggested that if more energy were put into publication of working papers it might relieve some of the pressure felt to complete TEI P2 itself. SH remarked on a number of concerns about the drafts distributed so far; she will send a detailed list to the editors. [This agreement was later changed: with NI, SH will draft a revision of chapter 11. -MSM] 5 OUTLINE OF MEETING ON 30-31 MAY SH asked what the editors hoped for from the meeting; they listed the following. 1. technical discussion: guidance for outstanding problems 2. technical discussion: reactions to solutions developed by work groups and editors 3. motivation of attendees to draft/revise chapters and sections in form closer to that required for P2 4. discussion: reactions to draft so far A propos of motivating the work groups to complete or revise their drafts, LB identified seven chapters for which the work group might con- ceivably produce a useful draft: 33 drama, 36 dictionaries, 37 computa- tional lexicon, 38 terminological data, 42 hypermedia, 44 analytic tools, 47 text criticism. MSM would add 41 cross references. MSM suggested that work groups might also conceivably produce chap- ters 52 writing system declaration, 53 feature system declaration, 61 TEI conformance, 62 modifying DTDs, 64 use of TEI scheme in interchange. For the agenda, MSM suggested going chapter by chapter through the draft, with discussion of global issues before and after. The global issues mentioned were: 1. style and presentation 2. organization of contents / revision of that organization 3. open questions from group 4. technical questions without home uncertainty 5. how the TEI should continue and how its organization could improve (at end of meeting only) Each chapter was to be discussed, with introductory remarks by the editor(s), summarizing salient technical points and raising technical questions to be discussed. The action required of the meeting is to approve the technical content of the chapter and clarify any outstanding questions, or else state why the material is not to be approved. Chapter 11 will produce a lot of discussion. For 13, MSM will produce a written outline. MSM will speak to chapter 21, LB to 22. Chapters 22 and 23 were expected to require a lot of time; they might not be completed until the end of the first day. In part III, LB and MSM felt the mechanisms for collections and embedded texts needed serious discussion. NI expected to have queries arising out of the draft for 36; Elli Mylonas might similarly have ques- tions for 33. In part IV, MSM wished Terry Langendoen to speak to chap- ter 44. The following tentative timetable was agreed upon for Saturday. 8:30: coffee 9:00: meeting starts: general questions, chapter 11 10:45: coffee 11:00: chapters 12, 13, 21, 22 12:30: lunch 2:00: chapters 22, 23 3:30: coffee 3:45: chapter 23, continued 7:00: dinner, Plaka The following timetable was drawn up for Sunday. 8:30: coffee 9:00: outstanding problems in parts III and IV 10:45: coffee 11:00: parts III and IV, continued 12:30: lunch 2:00: discussion, other topics 3:30: coffee 3:45: tag set description, global issues again, including future of the TEI, timetable for summer 7:00: dinner, Bistro 110 6 TIMETABLE FOR COMPLETION OF P2 AND P3 The committee discussed at length how much time a chapter takes to prepare, reviewed the current status of each chapter, and assigned pri- orities for the summer. The following approximate schedule for the summer resulted. In this list, I means 'first or second week', III means 'third or fourth week'. June I: 11, 23 June III: 13, 21, 22 July I: 38, 47 (and LB holidays and Coling) July III: 31, 39 (and MSM holidays) Aug I: 33, 36, 32 Aug III: 41, 42, 44 SH volunteered to draft an outline for the generic tutorial. ACTION: SH to draft outline for generic tutorial, modifying that given in ED W23 as necessary. Due: due date unspecified Document number: TEI U1 version 1 At this point the committee adjourned for the weekend, reconvening after the completion of the technical review meeting. 7 BUDGET MSM has not yet sent any payment to OUCS; OUCS thus still is owed 35000 ECU. MSM was instructed to make as large a partial payment as possible; the remainder should be paid as soon as the loan from ACL, or the funds from the EEC, arrive in Chicago. DW confirmed again that ACL would lend the remainder required to ACH until the EEC money arrived. LB requested that the payment take the form of a dollar check made out to Oxford University Computing Services, mailed direct to Keith Moulden with a one-sentence cover letter. ACTION: MSM to make initial payment to OUCS Due: asap ACTION: DW to take the necessary actions within ACL to loan the required amount to ACH. Due: asap [A payment of $22,400 or 17 500 ECU was mailed by certified mail on 3 June 1992. -MSM] AZ reported that the bankers in Pisa are willing to do anything required to ensure that the EEC money is transferred to Chicago without delays, but do not know what more they can do than was done on the last check. MSM promised to inquire with the bank to see what would help speed the processing of the check. [The bank requested that any drafts sent by mail should be addressed to the attention of the responsible individual at LaSalle National Bank, Rick Benoit. It recommended, how- ever, that wire transfer or SWIFT be used instead of postal delivery of paper drafts. MSM will provide full address, a sample cover letter, and the appropriate SWIFT number to AZ.] ACTION: MSM to send appropriate information about bank transfers to Pisa. Due: asap It was decided that the 53000 ECU expected as initial payment on the current EEC contract should be sent by AZ to Chicago immediately upon receipt. The next payment will be 44000 ECU, but a report is required. AZ would like to have a report drafted before leaving Chicago, in order to get processing of this payment started. This requires setting a date for distribution of the guidelines and convening of the advisory board. It also requires deciding what to send. It was decided to send Chapters 21-23 with a notation that they represent a draft prepared for a techni- cal review meeting, which has taken action on them, and chapter 34, bearing a notation that it is complete and has been made public. Myrdal has not been reported on; we could send all the Myrdal papers. 8 P2 TIMETABLE, REVISITED During the technical review meeting, volunteers were found to revise, redraft, or draft virtually all of parts I-IV, with deadlines staggered from 15 June to 31 July. The committee discussed in some detail how much confidence could be placed in the delivery of these sections and what quality could be expected in them. It was agreed that efforts should be made to ensure that as many sections as possible were in fact redrafted and that the results were as usable as possible, but the com- mittee also discussed at length what steps could be taken if the volun- teer work proved less useful than was hoped. LB suggested identifying a minimum deliverable version of TEI P2 to be completed by November; any chapters not identified as belonging to the minimum deliverable version would be supplied to the advisory board if ready, but not signaled as missing items if not ready. At SH's sug- gestion the committee agreed to drop the chapter on computational lexica from the table of contents. SH suggested that another review meeting in September (between 22 and 29 September) would be useful. This was agreed. LB was asked to inves- tigate possibilities in Britain; David Robey might be prevailed upon to assist with local arrangements if the meeting is held in Manchester. SH will investigate possible sites in New Jersey. This meeting should be three days, possibly three and a half. The committee expressed a pref- erence for a European location, funds permitting; MSM was asked to check on the budget for American travel. The technical review meeting was tentatively scheduled for September 25-27; a steering committee meeting was tentatively set for September 24 and 28th. ACTION: LB to investigate possible localities for technical review meeting in Britain. Due: asap ACTION: SH to investigate possible localities in New Jersey. Due: asap ACTION: MSM to report on American travel budget. Due: asap The timetable for P2 now calls for volunteers from the attendees of the technical review meeting to revise, redraft, or draft sections of the Guidelines as soon as possible; the deadlines for this are staggered over May and June. The volunteer work would provide almost everything to be included in parts 3, 4, and 5 of TEI P2. The editors will put this material together and issue it in fascicles, so that the entire document is ready to be reviewed in September by the next technical review meeting. After that, P3 will be put together as per recommenda- tions from the September meeting. AZ asked the editors to estimate the rate of completion to be expect- ed from the sections assigned and the amount of work the editors expect to save from their completion. After quick calculation, MSM gave as his estimate that about half the sections assigned would be completed on or about their deadlines. Of those completed, he estimated that they might save the editors about two-thirds of the work they would need to do if they had not been completed. SH felt that this might be unduly pessi- mistic; she expected almost all of the assigned sections to be complet- ed. Given the uncertainty of results from the volunteer work undertaken for the summer, the committee encountered difficulty agreeing on a firm date for the final meeting of the advisory board. The editors were unwilling to make a firm commitment to complete P2, even the truncated minimum deliverable P2, for the mid-November date tentatively agreed to earlier. NI suggested moving the meeting to December; the editors sug- gested moving it to March. After a long discussion of the process by which chapters are prepared for P2, the group agreed to delay setting a final date for the Advisory Board meeting until the September technical review meeting. If P2 is well in hand, the December or even the Novem- ber dates can be held to; otherwise later dates can be set. To help encourage the volunteer effort, it was agreed that SH would see all drafts as they come from the individual authors/revisors. NI will ask for individual sections. WP will be asked to send periodic notices of progress made to all attendees of the technical review meet- ing. These notices should mention arrival of drafts, etc. Anyone who wishes to ask for copies of the drafts can get one from WP. The editors were asked to send out as soon as possible a sample section of chapter 23 with a sample tag documentation section. ACTION: WP, MSM to send out periodic notices of drafts received, their progress, etc. Due: during summer ACTION: editors to send out a sample section of chapter 23 for use as a model Due: asap ACTION: editors to complete and distribute a draft of chapter 31 for use as a model by drafters of base tag sets Due: asap Document number: TEI P2 ch. 31 9 MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES 9.1 Harry Gaylord, ISO trip The committee considered, but did not approve, Harry Gaylord's request for assistance in funding his attendance at the upcoming meeting in Seoul of ISO/IEC JTC1 SC2 on character sets. The committee agreed in principle to HG's suggestion that the TEI should maintain liaison with ISO JTC1 SC2, but did not feel it was possible to fund the trip at this time. SH was asked to notify HG, and authorized to grant him up to $500 as partial funding, if he can raise the other funds elsewhere. ACTION: SH to extend our regrets to HG; we do not feel we have the funds to support this at this time. Due: immediately 9.2 Luc Dupuy MSM informed the committee of a letter from Luc Dupuy of Montre''al asking if the TEI would be interested in collaborating with the Canadian group represented by Dupuy in a research project exploring the possibil- ity of using TEI markup for Quebecois government documents. It was agreed that this would represent both a very good test bed for TEI tag- ging and a significant addition to the user base; MSM was asked to express interest, but to indicate that our current focus must be on com- pleting P2, not in further experimentation with P1. ACTION: MSM to reply to Dupuy expressing interest and postponing further discussion until after P2 Due: asap 9.3 Publication of Results SH expressed her disquiet over not having been informed earlier that NI is planning a special issue of CHum on the TEI, in which individual members of work groups have been invited to summarize the work of the groups as wholes. The committee recalled that at the first steering committee meeting (see TEI SC M1), all had agreed that the steering com- mittee would work together for publication of TEI working papers, and would discuss specific efforts together; the committee was concerned that the arrangements made for the CHum special issue violated the spir- it of that initial agreement. RA summarized his proposal that the TEI make more efforts to distrib- ute working papers prepared by the work groups. He would like to dis- tribute working papers in collections for individual working committees and work groups. These should be distributed in hard copy, in collec- tions. This topic was tabled to be discussed further in a future meet- ing. 10 FUTURE OF THE TEI This topic was postponed. 11 ROTATION OF SC CHAIR SH will remain as head of the steering committee at least until P2 is completed. 12 DATES OF NEXT SC MEETINGS A meeting was tentatively scheduled for 13-14 July in New Jersey. Draft June 4, 1992 (11:10:04)