OED2 and the Global TEI Conspiracy

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OED2 and the Global TEI Conspiracy

Lou Burnard-7
Two minor comments on OED2 -- my information, which is third hand and so
maybe inaccurate, indicates that OUP has expressed great interest in
making the electronic version of OED2 available under academic licence,
bundled with the rather fine search and display software produced by
Waterloo. To the list of sites mentioned by Bob Amsler should be added
the Universities of Michigan and Chicago, and  shortly, I think,
Southampton in the UK. There may well be others. If you are a student or
researcher at one of those forward thinking universities, you will
presumably be able to access the OED2 directly online over your campus
network for nothing. That is (again, I assume) the purpose of buying an
acdemic licence from OUP. I hope they sell many more!

I am entirely mystified by the notion that seems to have arisen in some
minds about a connexion between TEI and OED or indeed OUP. The TEI has
no connexion with OUP, other than through a coincidence of interest in
SGML which it shares with a hundred organisations.  There is no question
of OUP's influencing the TEI's recommendations about tagging or anything
else and if anyone has evidence to the contrary, then I would like to
hear it. And, if Bob will forgive my quibbling with him (again) in
public, as a matter of fact OED2 is *not* a conformant SGML document --
it has no DTD. Neither does it conform to TEI recommendations.

A last bad-tempered comment: this list is *not* primarily intended for
discussions about whether or not e-texts are in copyright, whether or
not there is a Global TEI Conspiracy to Deprive the People of their
Rights to Use Inadequate Markup, or whether or not SGML is a Good Thing.
Delightful though all such topics are, there are plenty of other places
where they may be discussed. This list is also not a moderated one, so
there is *no way* in which I or my fellow TEI editor can stop you
ignoring this intention. For that we have to rely on your good sense,
good manners and good humour.

We would like to read and share views about the substance of the current
TEI proposals, with a view to improving them. We do not believe we have
got it right yet, nor will we for quite a while yet. This forum is
provided for you to comment on the substance of the TEI proposals, not
to complain that they are being imposed on you. If you feel that they
are an imposition, it will be because you did not take the opportunity
to question them.

Lou Burnard