- i. Releases of the TEI Guidelines
- ii. Dedication
- iii. Preface and Acknowledgments
  iv. About These Guidelines iv. About These Guidelines
  v. A Gentle Introduction to XML v. A Gentle Introduction to XML
  vi. Languages and Character Sets vi. Languages and Character Sets
Note
            
                  1. 
            XML was originally developed as a way of publishing on
                  the World Wide Web richly encoded documents such as those for which
                  the TEI was designed.  Several TEI participants contributed heavily to
                  the development of XML, most notably XML's senior co-editor
                  C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, who served as the North American editor for
                  the TEI Guidelines from their inception until 1999. 
               
 ↵
                  2. 
            In the
                  ‘continuous writing’ characteristic of manuscripts from the early
                  classical period, words are written continuously with no intervening
                  spaces or punctuation.
               
 ↵
                  3. 
            New
                  textbooks about XML appear at regular intervals and to select any one
                  of them would be invidious. A useful list of pointers to introductory
                  web sites is available from http://www.xml.org/xml/resources_focus_beginnerguide.shtml;
                  recommended online courses include http://www.w3schools.com/xml/default.asp and http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/x-dw-xmlintro-i.html. 
               
 ↵
                  4. 
            We do not here discuss in
                  any detail the ways that a stylesheet can be used or defined, nor do
                  we discuss the popular W3C Stylesheet Languages XSLT and CSS. See
                  further Berglund (ed.) (2006), Clark (ed.) (1999), and 
                  Lie and Bos (eds.) (1999). 
               
 ↵
                  5. 
            
            
            See Extensible Markup
                     Language (XML) 1.0, available from http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml, Section 2.2
                  Characters.
               
 ↵
                  8. 
            
            Because
                  the opening angle bracket has this special function in an XML
                  document, special steps must be taken to use that character for other
                  purposes (for example, as the mathematical less-than operator); see
                  further section Character References.
               
 ↵
                  10. 
            The element names here have been chosen for
                  clarity of exposition; there is, however, a TEI element corresponding to
                  each, so that this example may be regarded as TEI conformable in the
                  sense that this term is defined in 23.3 Conformance.
               
 ↵
                  11. 
            Note that this simple example has not
                  addressed the problem of marking elements such as sentences
                  explicitly; the implications of this are discussed in section v.4. Complicating the issue.
               
 ↵
                  12. 
            The older terms
                  Document Type Declaration and Document Type
                     Definition, both abbreviated as DTD, may also be
                  encountered. Throughout these Guidelines we use the term
                  schema for any kind of formal document grammar.
               
 ↵
                  13. 
            ISO/IEC FDIS 19757-2 Document
                  Schema Definition Language (DSDL) -- Part 2: Regular-grammar-based
                  validation -- RELAX NG
               
 ↵
                  14. 
            
            See further 22 Documentation Elements and 23.4 Implementation of an ODD System. In practice, the only part of a TEI element
                  specification not expressed using TEI-defined syntax is the content
                  model for an element, which is expressed using the RELAX NG schema
                  language for reasons of processing convenience. RELAX NG uses its own
                  XML vocabulary to define content models, which is adopted by the TEI
                  for the same purpose. 
               
 ↵
                  16. 
            In XML, a single colon may also
                  appear in a GI, where it has a special significance related to the use
                  of namespaces, as further discussed in section Namespaces. The characters defined by Unicode as
                  combining characters and as extenders are
                  also permitted, as are logograms such as Chinese characters.
               
 ↵
                  17. 
            It will not have escaped the astute reader
                  that the fact that verse paragraphs need not start on a line boundary
                  seriously complicates the issue; see further section v.4. Complicating the issue.
               
 ↵
                  18. 
            This is
                  however a rather artificial example; XPath, for example, provides ways of distinguishing
                  elements in an XML structure by their position without the need to
                  give them distinct names. 
               
 ↵
                  19. 
            
            The official specification is at Clark and DeRose (eds.) (1999);  many
                  introductory tutorials are available in the XML references cited above
                  and elsewhere on the Web: good beginners' tutorials include http://www.w3schools.com/xpath/default.asp and http://www.zvon.org/xxl/XPathTutorial/, the latter being
                  available in several languages.
               
 ↵
                  21. 
            In the unlikely event that both kinds of quotation marks are needed within the
                  quoted string, either or both can also be presented in escaped form, using the
                  predefined character entities ' or "
 ↵
                  22. 
            
            The word ‘anyURI’ is a predefined name, used in
                  schema languages to mean that any Uniform Resource
                     Identifier (URI) may be supplied here. The accepted syntax for
                  URIs is an Internet Standard, defined in http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986. anyURI
                  is one of the datatypes defined by the W3C
                  Schema datatype library.
               
 ↵
                  24. 
            And, indeed, for those
                  responsible for deciding the licencing conditions if they change their
                  minds later.
               
 ↵
                  25. 
            
            DSDL is
                  a project of ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 WG 1, the object of which is to
                  ‘bring together different validation-related tasks and expressions
                  to form a single extensible framework that allows technologies to work
                  in series or in parallel to produce a single or a set of validation
                  results. The extensibility of DSDL accommodates validation
                  technologies not yet designed or specified.’ (http://dsdl.org).
               
 ↵
                  27. 
            Currently
                  BCP 47 comprises two Internet Engineering Task Force documents,
                  referred to separately as RFC 4646 and RFC 4647; over time, other
                  IETF documents may succeed these as the best current
                  practice.
               
 ↵
                  28. 
            This will exclude all
                  attributes where a non-textual datatype has been specified, for
                  example tokens, boolean values or predefined value lists.
               
 ↵
                  29. 
            Although only Unicode
                  is mentioned here explicitly, it should be noted that the
                  character repertoire and assigned code points of Unicode and
                  the ISO standard 10646 are identical and maintained in a way
                  that ensures this continues to be the case. 
               
 ↵
                  30. 
            The World Wide
                  Web Consortium provides recommendations for two standard
                  stylesheet languages: either CSS or
                  XSL could be used for this purpose.
               
 ↵
                  31. 
            
            
            
            In essence, when an SGML parser
                  encounters a reference to an entity of type SDATA, it supplies
                  to the application which it is servicing the name of that
                  entity, as found in the document, plus a pointer to a location
                  somewhere on the local system, and what is present at that
                  location may in turn allow or instruct the application to do
                  one of a number of things, including looking up the entity name
                  in a table and deriving information about the referenced entity
                  which can trigger specific behaviours in the application
                  appropriate to the processing of that abstract character. There
                  is however no way to make an XML parser do anything of the kind
                  in response to an entity reference.
               
 ↵
                  35. 
            For
                  further details, see The Unicode Character Property
                     Model (Unicode Technical Report #23), at http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr23/.
               
 ↵
                  36. 
            The use of ‘surrogate’ values to represent code points
                  beyond the 16-bit range is passed over here, since it adds a
                  complication that does not affect the key points at
                  issue
               
 ↵
                  1. 
            
            The
                  colon is also by default a valid name character; however, it has a
                  specific purpose in XML (to indicate namespace prefixes), and may
                  not therefore be used in any other way within a name.
               
 ↵
                  3. 
            Note that in this
                  context, phrase means any string of characters, and can
                  apply to individual words, parts of words, and groups of words
                  indifferently; it does not refer only to linguistically-motivated
                  phrasal units.  This may cause confusion for readers accustomed to
                  applying the word in a more restrictive sense.
               
 ↵
                  4. 
            
                  For more information on this highly influential family of standards, first
                  proposed in 1969 by the International
                  Federation of Library Associations, see http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/pubs/isbd.htm.
                  On the relation between the TEI proposals and other standards for
                  bibliographic description, see further section 2.7 Note for Library Cataloguers.
               
 ↵
                  5. 
            
            Agencies compiling catalogues of
                  machine-readable files are recommended to use available authority lists,
                  such as the Library of Congress Name Authority List, for all common
                  personal names.
               
 ↵
                  7. 
            In the case
                  of a TEI corpus (15 Language Corpora), a tagsDecl in a corpus
                  header will describe tag usage across the whole corpus, while one in
                  an individual text header will describe tag usage for the individual
                  text concerned.
               
 ↵
                  8. 
            On the
                  milestone tag itself, what are here referred to as
                  ‘variables’ are identified by the combination of the
                  ed and unit attributes.
               
 ↵
                  9. 
            Although the way in which a spoken text is performed,
                  (for example, the voice quality, loudness, etc.)  might be regarded as
                  analogous to ‘highlighting’ in this sense, these
                  Guidelines recommend distinct elements for the encoding of such
                  ‘highlighting’ in spoken texts. See further section
                  8.3.6 Shifts.
               
 ↵
                  10. 
            The
                  Oxford English Dictionary documents the phrase to come
                     down in the sense ‘to bring or put down; esp. to lay down money; to make a disbursement’ as being in use, mostly in colloquial or humorous contexts, from at
                  least 1700 to the latter half of the 19th century.
                  	
               
 ↵
                  11. 
            In some
                  contexts, the term regularization has a
                  narrower and more specific significance than that proposed here: the
                  reg element may be used for any kind of regularization,
                  including normalization, standardization, and
                  modernization.
               
 ↵
                  12. 
            The datatypes are taken from the W3C Recommendation XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition. 
                  The permitted datatypes are:
                  
                  
                  There 
                  is one exception: these Guidelines permit a time to be expressed as only a number of hours, or as a number of hours and minutes,
                  as per ISO 8601:2004 section 4.2.2.3 and 4.3.3. 
                  The W3C time and dateTime 
                  datatypes require that the minutes and seconds be included in the
                  normalized value if they are to be correctly processed for example
                  when sorting.
               
 ↵
                  13. 
            Many encoders find it convenient to retain the line
                  breaks of the original during data entry, to simplify proofreading,
                  but this may be done without inserting a tag for each line break of
                  the original.
               
 ↵
                  14. 
            For example, to distinguish
                  London as an author's name from
                  London as a place of publication or as a
                  component of a title.
               
 ↵
                  15. 
            Among the bibliographic software systems
                  and subsystems consulted in the design of the biblStruct
                  structure were BibTeX, Scribe, and ProCite.  The distinctions made by
                  all three may be preserved in biblStruct structures, though
                  the nature of their design prevents a simple one-to-one mapping from
                  their data elements to TEI elements.  For further information, see
                  section 3.11.4 Relationship to Other Bibliographic Schemes.
               
 ↵
                  16. 
            The analysis is not wholly unproblematic:  as the text of the
                  standard points out, the first subordinate title is subordinate only to
                  the parallel title in French, while the second is subordinate to both
                  the English main title and the French parallel title, without this
                  relationship being made clear, either in the markup given in the example
                  or in the reference structure offered by the standard.
               
 ↵
                  17. 
            
            The BibTeX scheme is
                  intentionally compatible with that of Scribe, although it omits some
                  fields used by Scribe. Hence only one list of fields is given
                  here.
               
 ↵
                  19. 
            As with all lists of ‘suggested
                  values’ for attributes, it is recommended that software
                  written to handle TEI-conformant texts be prepared to recognize and
                  handle these values when they occur, without limiting the user to the
                  values in this list.
               
 ↵
                  20. 
            Specifically,
                  characters in the Unicode blocks Alphabetic Presentation Forms, Arabic
                  Presentation Forms-A, Arabic Presentation Forms-B, Letterlike Symbols,
                  and Number Forms.
               
 ↵
                  21. 
            
             It should be kept in mind that any kind of text
                  encoding is an abstraction and an interpretation of the text at
                  hand, which will not necessarily be useful in reproducing an exact
                  facsimile of the appearance of a manuscript.
               
 ↵
                  23. 
            As elsewhere in these
                  Guidelines, this example has been formatted for clarity of exposition
                  rather than correct display. Note in particular that whether an XML
                  processor retains whitespace within the seg element or not
                  (this can be configured by means of the
                  xml:space attribute) this example will still require
                  additional processing, since white space should be retained for the lower level seg elements
                  (those of type syll) but not for the higher level
                  one (those of type foot).
               
 ↵
                  24. 
            For a
                  discussion of several of these see Edwards and Lampert (eds.) (1993); Johansson (1994); and
                  Johansson et al. (1991).
               
 ↵
                  25. 
            The original is a conversation between two children and
                  their parents, recorded in 1987, and discussed in
                  MacWhinney (1988)
 ↵
                  26. 
            For
                  the most part, the examples in this chapter use no sentence punctuation
                  except to mark the rising intonation often found in interrogative
                  statements; for further discussion, see section 8.4.3 Regularization of Word Forms.
               
 ↵
                  27. 
            The term was
                  apparently first proposed by Loman and Jørgensen (1971),
                  where it is defined as follows: ‘A text can be analysed as a sequence
                  of segments which are internally connected by a network of syntactic
                  relations and externally delimited by the absence of such relations with
                  respect to neighbouring segments. Such a segment is a syntactic unit
                  called a macrosyntagm’ (trans. S. Johansson).
               
 ↵
                  28. 
            We refer the reader to previous and
                  current discussions of a common format for encoding dictionaries. For
                  example, Amsler and Tompa (1988); Calzolari et al. (1990);Fought and Van Ess-Dykema; Ide and Veronis (1995); Ide et al. (1993); Ide et al. (1992); DANLEX Group (1987); and Tutin and Veronis (1998); Ide et al. (2000).
               
 ↵
                  29. 
            Tana de Gámez, ed., Simon and Schuster's International Dictionary (New
                     York: Simon and Schuster, 1973).
 ↵
                  30. 
            Complications of sequence caused by marginal or interlinear
                  insertions and deletions, which are frequent in manuscripts, or by
                  unconventional page layouts, as in concrete poetry, magazines with
                  imaginative graphic designers, and texts about the nature of typography
                  as a medium, typically do not occur in dictionaries, and so are not
                  discussed here.
               
 ↵
                  31. 
            This is a slight oversimplification. Even in conservative
                  transcriptions, it is common to omit page numbers, signatures of gatherings,
                  running titles and the like. The simple description above also elides, for the
                  sake of simplicity, the difficulties of assigning a meaning to the phrase
                  ‘original sequence’ when it is applied to the printed characters of a
                  source text; the ‘original sequence’ retained or recovered from a
                  conservative transcription of the editorial view is, of course, the one
                  established during the transcription by the encoder.
               
 ↵
                  32. 
            The omission of rendition text is particularly common in systems
                  for document production; it is considered good practice there, since automatic
                  generation of rendition text is more reliable and more consistent than
                  attempting to maintain it manually in the electronic text.
               
 ↵
                  33. 
            This chapter is based on the work of
                  the European MASTER (Manuscript Access through Standards for
                  Electronic Records) project, funded by the European Union from January
                  1999 to June 2001, and led by Peter Robinson, then at the Centre for
                  Technology and the Arts at De Montfort University, Leicester
                  (UK). Significant input also came from a TEI Workgroup headed by
                  Consuelo W. Dutschke of the Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Columbia
                  University (USA) and Ambrogio Piazzoni of the Biblioteca Apostolica
                  Vaticana (IT) during 1998-2000.
               
 ↵
                  34. 
            The coordinate space
                  may be thought of as a grid superimposed on a rectangular
                  space. Rectangular areas of the grid are defined as four numbers a b c d: the first two identify the grid point which
                  is at the upper left corner of the rectangle; the second two give the
                  grid point located at the lower right corner of the rectangle. The
                  grid point a b is understood to be the point
                  which is located a points from the origin along
                  the x (horizontal) axis, and b points from the origin along the y (vertical) axis.
               
 ↵
                  35. 
            The coordinate space used here is based on pixels, but
                  the mapping between pixels and units in the coordinate space need not
                  be one-to-one; it might be convenient to define a more delicate grid,
                  to enable us to address much smaller parts of the image. This can be
                  done simply by supplying appropriate values for the attributes which
                  define the coordinate space; for example doubling them all would map
                  each pixel to two grid points in the coordinate space.
               
 ↵
                  36. 
            
            
            The image is taken
                  from the collection at http://ancilla.unice.fr/Illustr.html, and was digitized from a copy
                  in the Bibliothèque Municipale de Lyon, by whose kind permission it is
                  included here
               
 ↵
                  39. 
            In the module described by
                  chapter 22 Documentation Elements a similar method is used to link element
                  descriptions to the modules or classes to which they belong, for
                  example.
               
 ↵
                  40. 
            Strictly, a suitable
                  value such as figurative should be added to the two place
                  names which are presented periphrastically in the second example here,
                  in order to preserve the distinction indicated by the choice of
                  rs rather than name to encode them in the first
                  version.
               
 ↵
                  41. 
            See http://earth-info.nga.mil/GandG/wgs84/index.html. The most
                  recent revision of this standard is known as the Earth Gravity Model
                  1996.
               
 ↵
                  42. 
            
            The OGC is an international voluntary consensus
                  standards organization whose members maintain the Geography Markup
                  Language standard. The OGC coordinates with the ISO TC 211 standards
                  organization to maintain consistency between OGC and ISO standards
                  work. GML is also an ISO standard (ISO
                  19136:2007).
               
 ↵
                  44. 
            Since no special purpose element is
                  provided for this purpose by the current version of the Guidelines,
                  such information should be provided as one or more distinct paragraphs
                  at the end of the encodingDesc element described in section
                  2.3 The Encoding Description.
               
 ↵
                  45. 
            Schemes similar to that proposed here were developed
                  in the 1960s and 1970s by researchers such as Hymes, Halliday, and
                  Crystal and Davy, but have rarely been implemented; one notable
                  exception being the pioneering work on the Helsinki Diachronic Corpus
                  of English, on which see Kytö and Rissanen (1988)
 ↵
                  46. 
            It is particularly useful to
                  define participants in a dramatic text in this way, since it enables the
                  who attribute to be used to link sp elements to
                  definitions for their speakers; see further section 7.2.2 Speeches and Speakers.
               
 ↵
                  47. 
            See in particular chapters
                  16 Linking, Segmentation, and Alignment, 17 Simple Analytic Mechanisms, and 18 Feature Structures.
               
 ↵
                  48. 
            We use the term alignment as a
                  special case for the more general notion of correspondence. Using A
                  as a short form for ‘an element with its attribute xml:id
                  set to the value A’, and suppose elements A1, A2,
                  and A3 occur in that order and form one group, while elements B1,
                  B2, and B3 occur in that order and form another group. Then a
                  relation in which A1 corresponds to B1, A2 corresponds to B2, and
                  A3 corresponds to B3 is an alignment. On the other hand, a
                  relation in which A1 corresponds to B2, B1 to C2, and C1 to A2 is
                  not an alignment.
               
 ↵
                  49. 
            The type
                  attribute on the note is used to classify the notes using the
                  typology established in the Advertisement to the work: ‘The
                  Imitations of the Ancients are
                  added, to gratify those who either never read, or may have
                  forgotten them; together with some of the Parodies, and
                  Allusions to the most excellent of the Moderns.’ In the
                  source text, the text of the poem shares the page with two sets
                  of notes, one headed ‘Remarks’ and the other
                  ‘Imitations’.
               
 ↵
                  50. 
            
            Since no special element is
                  provided for this purpose in the present version of these
                  Guidelines, the information should be supplied as a series of
                  paragraphs at the end of the encodingDesc element
                  described in section 2.3 The Encoding Description.
               
 ↵
                  52. 
            Like other XPointer schemes, bare names (i.e. values of
                  xml:id references) are permitted as pointer arguments to
                  all TEI-defined XPointer pointer scheme parameters.
               
 ↵
                  53. 
            Bare names (i.e., xml:id
                  values), like other Xpointer schemes, are permitted as range() parameters.
               
 ↵
                  54. 
            As always
                  seems to be the case, no two regular expression languages are
                  precisely the same. For those used to Perl regular expressions,
                  be warned that while in Perl the pattern tei
                  matches any string that contains tei, in
                  the W3C language it only matches the string ‘tei’.
               
 ↵
                  55. 
            See
                  section 17.3 Spans and Interpretations, where the text from which this
                  fragment is taken is analyzed.
               
 ↵
                  56. 
            
            The corresp attribute is thus distinct
                  from the target attribute in that it is understood
                  to create a double, rather than a single, link. It is also
                  distinct from the targets attribute in that the
                  latter lists all the identifiers of the elements that are
                  doubly linked, whereas the corresp doubly links the
                  element that bears the attribute with the element(s) that make
                  up the value of the attribute.
               
 ↵
                  58. 
            This sample is taken from
                  a conversation collected and transcribed for the British National
                  Corpus.
               
 ↵
                  59. 
            See section 17.1 Linguistic Segment Categories for discussion of the
                  w and c tags that can be used in the following
                  examples instead of the <seg type="word"> and <seg
                     type="character"> tags.
               
 ↵
                  60. 
            An alternative way of
                  representing this problem is discussed in chapter 21 Certainty, Precision, and Responsibility.
               
 ↵
                  61. 
            In this example, we have
                  placed the link next to the elements that represent the
                  alternants. It could also have been placed elsewhere in the document,
                  perhaps within a linkGrp. 
               
 ↵
                  62. 
            
            The variant readings are found in the commercial sheet
                  music, the performance score, and the Broadway cast recording.
               
 ↵
                  64. 
            This corresponds to the observation
                  that overlapping XML tags reflecting a textual version of such an
                  inclusion would not even be well-formed XML. This kind of overlap
                  in textual phenomena of interest is in fact the major reason that
                  stand-off markup is needed.
               
 ↵
                  65. 
            Or, as they are widely known,
                  attribute-value pairs; this term should not be confused,
                  however, with SGML or XML attributes and their values, which are similar in
                  concept but distinct in their formal definitions.
               
 ↵
                  66. 
            
            Neither this
                  constraint, nor the requirement that the whole of the text be
                  segmented by s elements is enforced by the current TEI
                  schemas; such constraints may however be introduced in a later version
                  of these Guidelines.
               
 ↵
                  68. 
            For the word-class tagging method used by CLAWS see
                  Marshall (1983); 
                  For an overview of the system see Garside et al. (1991). The example sentence was processed
                  using an online version of the CLAWS tagger at http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/ucrel/claws/trial.html
 ↵
                  69. 
            The recommendations of this chapter have
                  been adopted as ISO Standard 24610-1 Language Resource
                     Management — Feature Structures — Part One: Feature Structure Representation
 ↵
                  70. 
            Ways of pointing to components of a TEI document without
                  using an XML identifier are discussed in 16.2.1 Pointing Elsewhere
 ↵
                  71. 
            The treatment here is largely based on the
                  characterizations of graph types in Chartrand and Lesniak (1986)
 ↵
                  72. 
            
            That is, the three syntactic
                  interpretations of the clause are mutually exclusive.  The notion that
                  the pertinents are in Argyll is clearly not inconsistent with the notion
                  that both the land in Gallachalzie and the pertinents are in Argyll.
                  The graph given here describes the possible interpretations of the
                  clause itself, not the sets of inferences derivable from each syntactic
                  interpretation, for which it would be convenient to use the facilities
                  described in chapter 18 Feature Structures.
               
 ↵
                  74. 
            The symbols
                  e and t denote
                  special theoretical constructs (empty category and
                  trace respectively), which need not concern us here.
               
 ↵
                  75. 
            It has been shown, however, that it
                  is possible to relate the different annotations in an indirect
                  way: if the textual content of the annotations is identical,
                  the very text can serve as a means for linking the different
                  annotations, as described in Witt (2002). 
               
 ↵
                  76. 
            Grammar based schema languages (e.g., DTD, W3C
                  Schema, and RELAX NG) are used to define markup languages
                  (e.g., XHTML or TEI). Rule-based schema languages (e.g.,
                  Schematron) can be used to define further constraints. Such a
                  rule-based schema language permits a sequence of certain
                  elements between empty elements to be legitimized or
                  prohibited.
               
 ↵
                  77. 
            A fake namespace is
                  given for XInclude here, to avoid the markup being interpreted
                  literally during processing.
               
 ↵
                  78. 
            ODD
                  is short for ‘One Document Does it all’, and was the name
                  invented by the original TEI Editors for the predecessor of the system
                  currently used for this purpose. See further Burnard and Sperberg-McQueen (1995) and Burnard and Rahtz (2004).
               
 ↵
                  79. 
            Excluding model.gLike is
                  generally inadvisable however, since without it the resulting schema
                  has no way of referencing non-Unicode characters.
               
 ↵
                  80. 
            This is not strictly the case, since the element
                  egXML used to represent TEI examples has its own namespace,
                  http://www.tei-c.org/ns/Examples; this is the only
                  exception however. 
               
 ↵
                  81. 
            Full namespace support does not
                  exist in the DTD language, and therefore these techniques are
                  available only to users of more modern schema languages such as RELAX
                  NG or W3C Schema.
               
 ↵
                  82. 
            This module can be used to document any XML schema, and
                  has indeed been used to document several non-TEI schemas.
               
 ↵
                  83. 
            Here and elsewhere we use the word
                  schema to refer to any formal document grammar
                  language, irrespective of the formalism used to represent it.
               
 ↵
                  84. 
            An ODD processor should recognize
                  as erroneous such obvious inconsistencies as an attempt to include an
                  elementSpec in add mode for an element which is already present 
                  in an imported module.
               
 ↵
                  85. 
            The carthago program behind the Pizza Chef application,
                  written by Michael Sperberg-McQueen for TEI P3 and P4, went to very
                  great efforts to get this right. The XSLT transformations used by the
                  P5 Roma application are not as sophisticated, partly because the RELAX
                  NG language is more forgiving than DTDs.
               
 ↵
                  86. 
            
            
         Note that
                  deletion of required elements will cause the schema specification to
                  acccept as valid documents which cannot be TEI Conformant, since they
                  no longer conform to the TEI abstract model; conformance topics are
                  addressed in more detail in 23.3 Conformance.
               
 ↵