I have a few comments on the draft guidelines. It'd be nice to have

numbers printed on the pages. A letter size PDF would be useful, but

margins on this one seem generous enough to print on letter-sized

DP probably will not be preserving the long-s, and I think it a

Op 29-10-2004 01:06, schreef jij: Thanks for your comments. page the paper. I follow the ISO standard A4 size, which is an international standard, and offers several benefits to letter, which is only used in the US. I will keep margins generous though. little

unrealistic to expect most of PG's XML documents to preserve it. Also, the description is incorrect; in English, it's used everywhere except at the end of the word, and it was used until about 1800, making it used in the 18th century.

Agreed. I will make this optional, and indeed, expect most people to drop it. I normally keep it.

It's always used in Fraktur; are we going to preserve that? Counting

that, it was used until the middle of the 20th century. It's probably too minor for this document, but several German documents I've seen use a non-ligatured long-s/s combination for the eszett, while not using the long-s elsewhere. Even at the most pedantic, it's arguable

whether this should be encoded with the long-s.

I would suggest, let the person who prepares the text decide.

There should be an option to preserve running headers where they encode information not found elsewhere.

I did this once, in an easy, but non TEI fashion, the formal method is to use <fw> tags.

I think we should go with standards on the languages section; that is, RFC 3066 or its successor in draft. That is, #1, #2, #3, #8 with #5 found in the draft. #4 and #7 can be encoded as en-x-1800 and en-x-Scottish (how does this differ from sco?) in the draft, and I doubt anything would choke on it today. #6 is a bad idea, especially as 3 letter 639 codes

sometimes overlap with SIL codes; if you need to encode Gaddang, phi-x-SIL-gad or x-gaddang is a better idea.

Isn't sco gaelic? I agree, and will adjust the guidelines (and the texts and tools I have)

What happened to emph? All I see is rend. Likewise, I'd rather see foreign do italics and let you mark it with rend="none" if needed, as that would match how most books do it, and give a guideline to when to use foreign.

I partially marked up Japanese Literature, and eventually decided not to mark up all the non-italics Japanese words used in running English text, like names of plants and such. I think a comment to mark up running foreign text and italized foreign words, but avoid single words,

This is due to the way text are produced from printed sources, and it is often difficult to establish the reason a word is in italics. It could be because it is considered foreign, or for some other reason. I use foreign exclusively as a holder for the lang attribute. If you use the lang attribute consequently, you can use that to isolate fragments in a certain language. like

the names of plants and foods, in running text if not italized.

The decision to mark up words as foreign is sometimes difficult, and can impose a lot of work in such cases. I normally do this, as it helps much in spell checking. However, I would say, it is not required. Jeroen.