Digital scholarly editions are becoming AI training data. Grundtvig's Works, a comprehensive digital scholarly edition of the published writings of N.F.S. Grundtvig (1783–1872), exemplifies this shift. Close to 700 texts are currently published, and all materials are released under a CC0-license. In 2025, the project uploaded 632 of these TEI-encoded texts to Hugging Face, positioning the edition not just as a reader-facing publication but as research infrastructure for historical Danish language processing (Danish Foundation Models 2025; Enevoldsen et al. 2025). The project is now preparing to release its commentary layer: 160,000 explanatory notes across more than 21,000 pages that gloss archaic terms and contextualize nineteenth-century usage. Drawing on empirical analysis of the commentary layer’s structure, density, and editorial logic (Vad, Rasmussen & Baunvig 2024; Vad, Rasmussen & Baunvig forthcoming), this paper asks what happens when scholarly annotations become algorithmic infrastructure and proposes an infrastructure-aware editing approach.

For a low-to-medium resource language like Danish, where historical language data is scarce, these annotations could carry outsized importance. While one edition is modest, multiple annotated editions could significantly expand training data for historical Danish. Yet annotations are not neutral metadata: they encode editorial judgment about what requires explanation and how to frame context. When a note explains “højskole” – a term Grundtvig transformed from “university” to folk high school – it teaches language models interpretive frameworks shaped by scholarly tradition and institutional priorities.

This creates both opportunity and risk. Commentaries could help AI systems understand historical language and avoid hallucination. Yet they transmit editorial biases and where alternatives are scarce, such bias is amplified. The structure of digital cultural heritage reflects this asymmetry: ‘cultural saints’ like Grundtvig receive comprehensive editions with rich annotation, while ‘textual masses’ – newspapers, marginalized voices – remain poorly digitized (Baunvig 2023). This creates what Lassen et al. (2025) term a “vicious cycle of silencing”, where biases in data collection compound through the data science pipeline, systematically excluding certain groups as legitimate knowledge sources (p. 11).

Current discussions of AI in digital textual scholarship focus predominantly on what language models can do for editions: accelerating transcription, suggesting collations, identifying patterns (Pollin 2025). This paper reverses the lens, examining what happens when editions become training data for AI, with particular attention to how explanatory notes function as a mediating layer between historical text and algorithmic systems (Vad et al., forthcoming). It pursues two interconnected questions:

1. How should we conceptualize TEI annotation – explanatory notes, <seg> elements, <rs> references, named entities – when it functions as AI training data for low-resource languages? Are these structures ‘ground truth’, interpretive scaffolding, or something between?
2. What mechanisms might flag the curatorial nature of commentary within machine learning pipelines and prevent editorial asymmetries from becoming algorithmic inequities?

This positions TEI as a site for ethical AI development in multilingual contexts. The paper proposes infrastructure-aware editing: a reflexive open-science model that releases annotations while documenting the editorial frameworks that shaped them, making curatorial decisions legible to AI researchers rather than invisible in training pipelines.

We began a project in 2025 called "DigitAI" (named for our "Digit" program at Penn State Behrend) with intentions to make a "black box" technology explainable to ourselves and to find out if we can design a minimal and efficient small-scale language model system that can run on a laptop computer. At first, DigitAI was an experiment to supply a Small Language Model (SLM) with Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG)–giving it query access to a structured “ground truth” knowledge base derived from the XML structure of the TEI P5 Guidelines.

We launched our project with these primarily educational goals in view:

1. To learn how to design a small-scale “explainable AI” system, that is, a system designed to give students and scholars in arts and humanities fields their own agency and purpose in building, training, augmenting, and applying an AI with local installations.
2. To create a local coding assistant to serve as a guide for decision-making in humanities text encoding with TEI XML, or on a particular XML project with a defined encoding schema, responding to experiments by Khemakhem (2024) Scholger et al. (2024), and Pollin et. al. (2025).

Preparing our RAG involved parsing the TEI Guidelines (available as a complete XML document in P5.xml from the TEI Guidelines repository) in a context-aware manner, stored and accessed in information "chunks" based on the text content of XML element nodes.

At first, we tried to model the entire TEI Guidelines (available from the TEI GitHub repository in a single document as P5.xml) in a context-aware “chunking” strategy, mapping XML node data into a graph structure. Preparing the RAG resource (shared at the 2025 TEI Conference) involved a complex XSLT transformation of the TEI P5.xml document into neo4j's graph structure–attempting to convert every possible relationship of the paragraphs of the Guidelines chapters and their associated schema definitions. Apparently we were creating a bloated” and suboptimal version of the TEI, and worse, it appeared that our model was relying on word embeddings to translate the information it received from the incomplete graph RAG. We called a halt to the neo4J RAG database effort as impractical as soon as we learned about Model Context Protocol.

Model Context Protocol (MCP), introduced by Anthropic and now open source, helped us to concentrate on supplying XML technologies to the language model (e.g. Skywork AI 2025). We have now designed a new SLM with agency to apply MCP as a tool to address a TEI XML tree with XPath, XQuery, and XSLT. This time our DigitAI can more reliably address XML project files to explore a TEI project codebase and aid in precisely identifying and continuing partially completed encoding.

We hope to share a look "under the hood" at our SLM + MCP system at the 2026 TEI conference. As this is an area of expertise in our team and program, we are confident that if we can teach humans to write XPath, we can script what is needed for an agentic AI system to access an XPath MCP service.

The TEI ODD system organizes elements and attributes into a variety
of different collections: attributes are usually defined within class
specifications, and elements are members of modules, claim membership
of attribute classes, and are grouped in models and macros. But despite the
use of the word class, little in this infrastructure is a class in the way
that we would use the word in the context of an object-oriented language
such as Java.
This paper will argue that when we come to re-examine the ODD system
for TEI P6, we should consider creating a genuine hierarchical class system.
We hint at this when we talk, for example, of <persName> being "syntactic
sugar" for <name type="person">. Some elements in TEI are more abstract
and some are more specified, constrained versions of them. We might, for
example, construct an inheritance hierarchy like this:
<rs>
-<name>
--<persName>
---<surname>
---<forename>
--<eventName>
--<placeName>
...
Similarly, the <list> element is a more abstract ancestor of <listPerson>, <listOrg>,
<listPlace> etc. <ab>, being the least-specified block element, might be an ancestor
of <div>, which might be an ancestor of <p>.
This kind of hierarchy, as applied to the ontology of textual components that TEI
provides, is obviously distinct from the structural hierarchy of a document, as
embodied in the content models of a schema: <list> would be parent of
<listPerson> in the taxonomy, but of <item> in its content model. But when we are
defining those content models, an ontological hierarchy would be highly convenient.
In contexts where it makes sense, including <list> in a content model would
automatically allow all its descendant elements (the other list types); elsewhere,
such as in a <particDesc>, only a <listPerson> or a <listOrg> might be specifically
included.
Similarly, attribute definition could be applied at any level in the hierarchy. If <date>
is a member of att.datable, then this membership would be automatically inherited by its
descendants (<birth>, <death>, <creation>, <origDate>, <docDate>, etc.).
It would be ideal if the entire ontology could be arranged in the form of a series of
well-formed trees, but this is surely impractical. Instead, we could adopt a
multiple-inheritance model such as we see in Python or C++. This would
allow, for example, <floruit> to descend from both <date> and <state>. Elements
could be characterized in terms of their semantics according to some ancestors, and
their typical mise-en-page in terms of others. The existing model class system
attempts to do this, but it has arisen in rather an ad-hoc manner in the service of
wrangling content models, and some model classes are quite puzzling. While
model.milestone-like, for example, might form a solid basis for class inheritance
descending from <milestone>, it is much harder to see the logic behind e.g.
model.pPart.data, which "groups phrase-level elements containing names, dates,
numbers, measures, and similar data."
A clear definition of the taxonomies by which TEI elements could be categorized
(semantic, bibliographic, domain-related, etc.), along with robust object hierarchies
based on multiple inheritance, would greatly enhance the coherence and maintainability
of the TEI ODD infrastructure.

With digital editions creating connections to other projects and contexts and with their integration in the linked data landscape, matching and comparing information across different projects and datasets becomes an important aspect of digital editorial practice: Annotation of entities in TEI XML documents allows both complementing and verifying a project's information and interpretations. In serial or tabular data cleaning contexts, it is common to rely on technical mechanisms and procedures to assist this process of entity reconciliation. This submission argues that the very same mechanisms and procedures can also benefit digital editions and that they should be more than ad hoc solutions, tailored to a particular project and a specific authority database. It presents the Reconciliation API specification that has its origins in the Freebase/OpenRefine software and community, and it discusses how an implementation of the API proposal in the TEI Publisher (TP) platform allows a digital edition to operate both as a client and as a server for reconciliation operations.

The Reconciliation API spec defines ways of matching entities using various hints or conditions, and it includes additional endpoints for providing preview UI components or autocompletion strings. It also includes a data extension facility with which clients can query and adopt arbitrary property values of the entities hosted by the service. The spec follows W3C best practices and is currently at version 1.0-draft, while the W3C Entity Reconciliation Community Group is in the process of transitioning to a W3C Working Group (eventually getting the spec on the W3C standards track).

The TP implementation picks up on work already available in TP's annotation module, where a reconciliation connector has facilitated access to a wide range of authority databases [1] for a while. Besides updating this (client) connector, the presentation introduces a reconciliation server component for TP. This allows the TP instance to act as an authority database for other TP instances' (or its own) annotation connector, or for data cleaning and curation processes in OpenRefine, R, Python etc.

The presentation mentions typical usage scenarios, but it also invites discussions about the definition of entities, properties and concrete heuristics for matching and ranking: While the API spec provides for many entity types and complex matching logic, the current implementation is a proof of concept, restricted to persons and places and to exact, wildcard and regex string matching. Extending this is obviously very welcome, but it is not clear how far a generic component can go and what should be left to each project to define. In that sense, the presentation also seeks to unsettle established reconciliation practices.

[1] See a list of reconciliation services on the Reconciliation service test bench: https://reconciliation-api.github.io/testbench/. This table in effect gets reconciliation service endpoints via a Wikidata SPARQL query and then runs them through a validator to report on the supported API versions and optional features. Future TP-based digital edition projects can thus easily be included.

References

- OpenRefine software: https://openrefine.org/
- Reconciliation Spec Proposal: https://reconciliation-api.github.io/specs/1.0-draft/
- Reconciliation API testbench: https://reconciliation-api.github.io/testbench/0.2/#/
- W3C Entity Reconciliation Community Group: https://www.w3.org/groups/cg/reconciliation/

It has been 11 years[1] since the TEI Processing Model was first presented at the TEI Conference in Lyon and shortly after became part of the TEI Guidelines. It's not easy to say how many digital editions and other scholarly publications are using it, but certainly enough to draw some conclusions,[2] relevant to shaping the TEI's future.

In a decade of writing ODDs with TEI Processing Models for a great variety of projects, it seems the main challenges of using TEI for publishing and interoperability do not lie where they are commonly perceived: definitely not in the large number of available elements nor the complexity of the TEI schema. The recently released teipublisher.odd,[3] a successor of the teiSimplePrint.odd originally released by TEI-C, serves as a base for Processing Model customizations for all TEI Publisher editions, which is to say it tries to cover the sensible default handling for a large body of possible TEI documents —an aim comparable with the familiar TEI Stylesheets.

This comprehensive TEI ODD contains around 250 model specifications for just over a 100 TEI elements. Numbers average to around 2.5 models per element but such a picture is misleading: over 60% of elements needs just one model, and only 15 elements require 4 or more models. Closer examination of model and behaviour distributions across the TEI elements, in conjunction with analysis of customization needs for editions identifies clear directions for the TEI as a standard to provide its community a strong, interoperable basic framework, without compromising on its winning formula for flexibility and extendability.

This paper is going to discuss in detail where exactly the sensitive areas lie (e.g. formalization of generalization, specialization and meronymic relations), in the hope that future TEI development will address these as a priority for the benefit of the larger community.

[1] Eleven years “[...] what do you get? Another day older and deeper in debt” (M. Travis, Sixteen tons); see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteen_Tons.

[2] Largest registry of editions using the TEI Processing Model is the Project Registry maintained by e-editiones: https://www.e-editiones.org/map/

[3] https://github.com/eeditiones/jinks/blob/main/profiles/base10/resources/odd/teipublisher.odd

We conventionally think of computer text and document formats in terms of hierarchically layered functionality: Unicode encodes individual glyphs, HTML specifies the abstract structure of underlying plain text, and CSS concretely styles an HTML document. Unfortunately, these tidy abstractions collapse upon contact with the actual technologies. In reality, Unicode, HTML, and CSS can each (partially) encode, structure, and style text.

What we require is a proper accounting of the remit of a digital text or document format. The problem lies in there being no obvious boundary between contentful text in itself and formatting or structure imposed upon it. Bolding may be a mere visual flourish in a novel, but essential to a mathematical treatise. So, should bolding be handled at the markup or character set level? TEI P5 offers some guidance here, but both positions come down to taste. This stratification of text into character sets and markup is, I argue, unnatural and historically contingent; no single, universally applicable boundary between text and formatting or character and markup can exist. The salience of concrete, visual characteristics or structure to the meaning of text is always indexed to a particular text.

Instead, we might imagine the space of document formats as a continuum between the fully concrete, such as a typeset PDF, and fully abstract, such as an application-specific XML schema. TEI is unique in its ability to run this gamut to nearly both extremities within a single mechanism, and in this respect sits at an undertheorized position in this space. Indeed, TEI even includes a facility to define new characters altogether and thus is, in a remote sense, a character set encoding unto itself! While TEI serves as an embryonic model of what a truly universal text and document format could be, it is unsuited to this role in its present form due to, among other things, the rather extreme syntactic overhead of XML itself.

In this talk, I introduce Telecode: a new, single standard for encoding, structuring, and styling text, harmonizing the capabilities of Unicode and TEI. Telecode includes both a new character set and an XML-like data model which subsumes XML-based document formats such as TEI—all TEI documents can be expressed as Telecode text—but expands its scope to cover encoding all text at all levels of formatting. I further describe a novel binary encoding for Telecode text, which is competitive with UTF-8 Unicode in compactness. I finally give an overview of Telecode tooling, including an open source editor and software library that I have authored.

Telecode's design is particularly attuned to the needs of minority and minoritized writing system communities. Text as a category is not and cannot be a static thing. Text encodings must meet the needs of an ever increasing number of computerized scripts, but the expansion of many such technologies in functionality is metered by standardization bodies. Telecode unifies character encoding itself with a more advanced form of TEI's character declaration features and is thus readily adaptable to new scripts in a decentralized manner.

About his famous painting, “La trahison des images“, René Magritte said:

‘The famous pipe. How people reproached me for it! And yet, could you stuff my pipe? No, it's just a representation, is it not? So if I had written on my picture "This is a pipe", I'd have been lying!’

Other interpretations notwithstanding, both painting and quote show the importance to make a clear distinction between a representation and an actual thing; or a “signifié” and “signifiant“, to use Saussure’s terms.

Regarding the TEI and a possible P6, this to my mind means that we need a clearer distinction between “the three TEIs”. We have a set of elements and attributes for schema description/definition, for text description, and for meta data (in the broadest sense).

The problem is that these three sets that have very distinct uses share a lot of elements and attributes. We have cases that state what an element or attribute is about when annotating a text, just to add that it has a completely different meaning when used in a schema defintion.

This makes reusing the data much more complicated as one cannot be certain that, e.g., a word contained in a tei:p is actually part of a text.

My poster will present this, admittedly radical, approach how to fully separate the three areas, thus reducing ambiguity, improving interoperability, and making information retrieval easier. It is, however, aimed at retaining as much compatibility with P5 as possible by trying to reuse existing definitions wherever that is possible.

I hope to spark a discussion about whether this is a good approach and how a new P6 would be drawn up.

When working with variant texts, scholars often struggle to express textual complexities in a formal, machine-processable manner: it is the familiar balance between standardization and flexibility (Eide 2015). In textual scholarship, this is further complicated by linguistic, cultural, and disciplinary differences (Spadini et al. 2016; Bleeker et al. 2025a). As of yet, there is no shared vocabulary to describe textual variation, tools and datasets lack interoperability (Martignano 2023a), and visualizations are often project-specific and not reusable (Franzini et al. 2019).

The international working group “VIDIT” (Visualising and Investigating Differences in Texts) aims to address these challenges by (1) developing a taxonomy of core concepts related to textual variation, and (2) establishing best practices for collation and visualization tools (Bleeker and Nava, 2025b). This poster provides an update of VIDIT’s activities, focusing on the methodological approach and the first taxonomy results.

The taxonomy development has three stages. First, core concepts of text variation are collaboratively identified. For each concept, examples are gathered from texts from different periods and genres, along with definitions from scholarly publications, tool documentation, and encoding guidelines. Rather than imposing a single definition, we identify the range of meanings and contexts of use. Second, these concepts are structured following knowledge organization principles: identifying hierarchies, clarifying overlaps and distinctions, and documenting conditions under which different definitions apply. Third, the taxonomy is aligned with existing ontologies in the field (Giovannetti 2019, Martignano 2023b, Spadini 2019[2023]).

Our methodology has raised several questions, among others relating to the balance between comprehensiveness and usability. When and how to prioritise consensus over diversity? How to ensure the taxonomy’s relevance as digital methods evolve, and how to couple the taxonomy with the TEI Guidelines? We welcome feedback on the above questions as well as on our methodological approach and the first taxonomy results.

This poster reports the preliminary findings from my field work to Mexico City, one of the leading places for the creation of artivism (art + activism) that seeks to address social inequalities and oppression. During the trip, I photographed street art (graffiti, banners, mural paintings) produced in the context of International Women’s Day on March 8^th, 2026. The present research is part of my doctoral dissertation that tracks how contemporary literary works by Mexican women are increasingly engaging with horror and the gothic mode to grapple with gender-based violence. To complement my analysis of literary representations, I propose that we turn to other art forms and spaces through which women denounce heteropatriarchal, racial, and colonial violence. Given graffiti’s discursive power but also its ephemeral nature, I approach its textual study as a practice of recovery that seeks to amplify marginalized voices and make visible women’s concerns.

To standardize my research, I visited three specific locations before and after the social mobilizations of March 8. Tracing the same locations at different times provides insights into censorship and the erasure of women’s demands for justice. After the trip, I transcribed, encoded, and annotated a sample of visual materials following TEI guidelines. Some preliminary parameters I have identified include location; temporality; the surface (for example, fence, cement sidewalk, monument); and themes (femicide, reproductive rights, domestic abuse, among others). The purpose of cataloguing these images as text is twofold: to explore how text encoding enriches our understanding of the often-underrepresented street narrative and how these textual examples expand our use of TEI through a feminist lens. Ultimately, my research aims to contribute to current activism and debates that are in the process of creating a language that allows us to recognize, name, and address gender violence and its aftermath.

An interdisciplinary project on the topic of ethics and AI is currently being prepared at the University of Rostock. Researchers from medicine, computer science, ethics, interdisciplinary research, and DH aim to jointly explore the role of AI agents in settings of co-medical reasoning (Salloch and Eriksen, 2024, Porsdam Mann et al., 2024) and situatedness (Troqe, Lakemond and Holmberg, 2024). To this end, AI agents are developed and assessed in the area of longevity and dementia studies, focusing on ethical implications.

The DH subproject aims to model and evaluate chat logs for medical consultations as text corpora. Of particular interest is linking the texts with situation-related parameters (e.g., when and where someone used the chat), information about the patients (gender, age, health status), and other protocols of human conversation (between doctor and patient). The aim is to map the collaborative process of consultation, anamnesis, and diagnosis (co-medical reasoning) and the co-situating of AI agents with human participants.

We are currently evaluating whether and to what extent modeling the data in XML-TEI would be useful for the project (using elements for encoding CMC corpora, transcriptions of speech, and the profile description in the TEI header). This is a novel approach in the field of medical and AI research on this topic, but it is promising in view of the desired modeling of co-situatedness. First, fictitious chat logs are created with Chat-GPT on the topic of longevity and counseling, which are used for modeling purposes, as the protection of personal data must be taken into account when using real chats (see examples at https://github.com/hennyu/longevity-chats). The poster presents the current state of preparatory work for the project and invites discussion with the TEI community.

Digital editions of correspondence are vital projects for the analysis of historical and cultural figures and events in addition to being popular training grounds for students. While the TEI Correspondence SIG has codified editorial standards and the web service correspSearch and the review journal RIDE have improved discoverability and methodological transparency, knowledge of the range of possibilities with source encoding and presentation remains difficult to acquire.

What is the current state of the digital scholarly edition of correspondence in the global DH community? There are significant differences in text encoding projects emerging from various geopolitical contexts. Greedy of time, funding, expertise, and labor, such projects have historically benefited from large teams, particularly in the historic "center" of digital humanities activity in North America and Europe. Given increased resource constraints and a diminished funding outlook, scholars in what we call the "South" but also increasingly in Northern contexts, have led a turn towards minimal computing frameworks. Are there lessons to be learned from examining projects emerging from the centers and margins of DH knowledge production that will improve our collective understanding of the planning and execution of these projects?

In this poster presentation, I report preliminary findings from a thematic and methodological analysis of a diverse corpus of correspondence editions. I will track variables including: the historical period and language(s) of the sources, disciplinary and theoretical frameworks, the DH methods used, the encoded entities, technical infrastructure (static or dynamic site software), as well as project longevity. By aggregating and analyzing these features, this study will establish a framework for identifying current methodological patterns and build awareness for the diversity of approaches possible within this community of practice.

This poster presents the integration of social media data into the Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese 2 (BCCWJ2) and examines how heterogeneous computer-mediated communication (CMC) environments can be modeled within the TEI CMC framework.

The original Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese (BCCWJ), released in 2011 by the National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics, is a publicly available, genre-balanced corpus of modern written Japanese, including books, magazines, white papers, and web texts. It has served as a foundational resource for Japanese linguistics. However, most of its materials date from 2005 or earlier. To better reflect contemporary language use, BCCWJ2 (2024–2028) aims to expand the corpus to approximately 200 million words by incorporating texts published between 2006 and 2025, including digital communication that now plays a central role in everyday written practices.

A key challenge is the inclusion of social media data. Our project integrates both microblogging platforms (Bluesky and Misskey) and a messaging service (LINE). While the TEI CMC Guidelines provide models for Twitter-like services and for messenger-style interaction, actual platforms present service-specific complexities that do not always align with text-centered encoding assumptions.

Particular issues arise in encoding platform-specific reactions and visual elements. Misskey supports custom, non-Unicode emoji used as reactions, and LINE employs stickers and rich reaction systems that cannot be reduced to plain text. These semiotic elements function as discourse acts yet resist straightforward textual representation. By comparing microblogging and messaging ecologies within a single corpus design, this project evaluates how far TEI CMC can accommodate diverse social media practices and where customization may be required.

We argue that constructing a balanced corpus including such data contributes to documenting contemporary Japanese linguistic life and promotes sustainable, interoperable, and globally accessible Japanese language resources.

TEI Publisher[1] provides a flexible and sustainable toolbox which enables scholars to publish their material without forcing a one-size-fits-all framework. It lays out a smooth and fast entry path for editors with little technical experience while remaining endlessly flexible and extensible for advanced users.

With the newest version, based on Jinks application manager,[2] the key TEI Publisher idea of assembling an edition from modular "lego" blocks is taken to the next level. The core of TEI Publisher itself is now decomposed into a set of small, modular profiles, which can be combined and configured to assemble concrete applications. Each profile provides end-to-end implementation for a particular aspect of a digital edition, e.g. support for a certain input format, integration of facsimile images, display of timelines or maps.

TEI Publisher now comes with a central application manager, Jinks, which manages all profiles and all the applications generated from it. Thus, the creation of an application is no longer a one-time generative step, but it can be approached iteratively: new features may be added or removed, and the configuration for the existing ones can be modified. The same user interface which first allowed us to select, pre-configure and generate our application, can be used to reconfigure and regenerate it at any later point.

As new profiles are added to the public library—or new versions are released—this application manager is able to update profiles and custom applications under its control. Updates can largely be carried out automatically with the number of necessary manual interventions reduced to a minimum and most updates can be applied with a single click. Long-term maintenance of our editions is thus guaranteed and easily achieved.

[1] https://teipublisher.com
[2] https://github.com/eeditiones/jinks/tree/main

As part of a project to convert the Taishō Tripiṭaka—the scholarly standard edition of the Chinese Buddhist canon—into TEI-compliant XML, we are migrating Siddhaṃ script data from an internal transcription rule to Unicode to facilitate better data exchange. Siddhaṃ is a medieval Brahmic script spread to East Asia approximately between the 6th and the 8th centuries as a medium for Buddhist texts; it has been preserved there as a liturgical alphabet for transcribing Indic syllables.

Beyond its complex ligature system inherent to Indic abugidas, Siddhaṃ has acquired ideographic or iconic qualities in East Asia. Due to its religious role and the influence of the logographic Chinese writing system, specific variants have become associated with fixed meanings. In the Japanese Esoteric Buddhist (Mikkyō) tradition, this differentiation of variants is particularly systematic in the use of shuji (種字; “seed syllables”) to represent specific deities.

During the migration process, we compared our original notations in the Taishō Tripiṭaka against facsimile images and other Siddhaṃ resources. This examination revealed various non-standard glyphs, including irregular akṣaras (syllables), idiosyncratic variants, and possibly unencoded symbols and conjuncts. This presentation provides a preliminary overview of Siddhaṃ usage in the Taishō Tripiṭaka, evaluates current Unicode and font support, and discusses optimal encoding strategies for academic Siddhaṃ texts.

Born-digital heritage initiatives increasingly preserve software as cultural artefacts, yet the textual status of source code itself remains comparatively underexplored. This poster proposes a deliberately provocative, TEI-centered experiment: what happens if computer code is encoded not merely as functional notation, but as a literary and line-based textual form comparable to verse?

The approach focuses on early home-computer listings, especially from languages such as BASIC, whose syntax was explicitly designed to resemble natural language. Especially in these sources, but also in other programming languages, code is not only executable instruction, but also a material writing practice: visually arranged (through indentation and lineation), rhythmically structured (through loops and iterations), stylistically distinctive (particularly when deviating from normative coding conventions), and often strongly associated with individual authorship. Like poetry, code is usually processed line by line; lineation structures interpretation, pacing, hierarchy, and semantic grouping.

Against this background, the poster explores several experimental directions within the TEI. The central question is whether source code, when understood as authored and lineated text, can be represented through structures traditionally associated with verse. Possible approaches include the repurposing, conceptual broadening, or even renaming of elements such as <l> and <lg>.

At the same time, the poster explicitly addresses objections to this approach: the danger of collapsing distinctions between functional and aesthetic texts, violating established TEI semantics, or obscuring computational structures already represented through parsers and formal grammars. Rather than advocating an immediate standardization effort, the poster presents these encodings as experimental interventions intended to test the conceptual boundaries of TEI itself.

Ultimately, the poster asks a broader methodological question relevant to textual scholarship and digital philology alike: is verse defined by aesthetics, by material layout, or by structural segmentation? And what happens to TEI semantics when executable code is treated as authored, lineated text?

#sky {

color: blue;

border: none;

}

This presentation reports on a very recent development, following the May 2026 meeting, regarding ISO's initiative for the coding of language varieties. The outcome will directly affect the IETF language tag format (BCP 47), which is employed as the value of @xml:lang, @docLang, and similar attributes in TEI. The planned framework has been under preparation for years within an ISO working group, which has already produced the introductory standards ISO 21636-1, -2 (TR), and -3. Building on these, a coding standard—tentatively titled "21636-4" and intended to complement ISO 639 and BCP 47—is now being discussed in collaboration with the BCP 47 maintainers. The new framework will cover previously underrepresented aspects of language, including what are commonly called "dialects," with eight dimensions: space, time, social group, medium, situation, person, proficiency, and communicative functioning. These layers of description will enable powerful and fine-grained identification of language varieties across a wide spectrum of applications, from documentation and corpora to AI-assisted encoding. Thus far, consensus has been reached that the code will be implemented as a BCP 47 extension; however, the working group is still in urgent need of input from user and expert communities on a wide range of details, including structural design, identifier (subtag) format, and maintenance bodies. This poster presents the current standardization progress and the known roadmap, aiming to draw attention from the TEI and DH communities and invite future engagement.

This study focuses on the limitations of right-to-left (RTL) editing in the editing software oXygen and proposes practical methods for improving annotation input of Arabic text in TEI. Although the software provides an RTL display mode, the tagging workflow remains optimized for left-to-right languages, making rapid markup difficult and hindering researchers from creating TEI/XML of Arabic materials. To address this usability gap, this project explores layout-based strategies such as inserting line breaks at the word level, performing bottom-to-top range selections, and dividing text into smaller, directionally stable units to improve the efficiency of RTL annotation.

From the 18th century onward, Japan began to adopt practical knowledge, such as medicine, from the West, particularly from countries like the Netherlands. During this process, dictionaries of Japanese corresponding to Western languages were written, but there was a problem: Japanese is written vertically and read from right to left, while Western languages are written horizontally and read from left to right. Japanese scholars such as Yoan Udagawa experimented with various layouts to accommodate languages with different writing orientations on the same page. This progressed from the first stage, where Western languages were written horizontally and Japanese vertically on vertically ruled notebooks, to the fourth stage, still in use today, where Western languages were written horizontally and Japanese horizontally from left to right on horizontally ruled notebooks. While it can be argued that the traditional Japanese writing style has been lost, it offers great convenience, as both languages can be read in the same orientation.

Meanwhile, Yoan Udagawa conducted experiments on various layouts for Arabic text. This study, drawing inspiration from his ideas, employs methods such as arranging Arabic texts vertically with line breaks between each word and evaluates their usability to explore better methods for inputting mixed Eastern and Western language texts with TEI.

Accurate date normalisation—mapping partial or abbreviated date expressions to canonical era–year–month–day forms—is a prerequisite for reliable `<date>` TEI encoding, and a task where LLMs offer evident potential in sparse-data historical settings. Yet systematic evidence of where automated inference succeeds and where it requires human intervention remains absent, hampering principled deployment in scholarly editing. This challenge corresponds to D4—semantic recognition—in the TEI encoding quality framework of Strutz (2026), the dimension least amenable to automation.
We demonstrate a controlled experiment using the Shōsōin Document—an eighth-century Japanese administrative corpus whose interleaved records from multiple concurrent scribal projects pose particular difficulties for contextual reasoning—as a testbed for LLM-assisted date normalisation. Our central methodological contribution is that context must be aligned to scribal work units rather than physical page boundaries: splitting context at page breaks severs the era and year information necessary to resolve partial date expressions. Where even a scribal unit lacks era or year information, we inject an anchor passage from the immediately adjacent unit. A 100-instance gold standard spanning four date pattern types was evaluated using Claude Sonnet 4.6, guided by a structured annotation guideline as the sole task specification—without fine-tuning.
This architecture achieves 91.8% overall accuracy (90/98 evaluable instances): 100% on complete and abbreviated forms, 95.5% on year-omitted expressions, and 78.1% on year-month-omitted expressions. We introduce ΔC, a distance metric quantifying how far beyond a date's own scribal unit the necessary contextual evidence resides, and show that anchor injection effectively resolves ΔC = 1 cases. Residual failures are structurally irreducible: month ambiguity in multi-month ledgers, where the same day number appears in consecutive months, cannot be resolved from textual context alone. This failure taxonomy supports a principled human-in-the-loop design—the ΔC metric flags cases for expert review, enabling automated processing of the majority while concentrating human effort where it is genuinely indispensable.

Keio University has a long history of Digital Humanities activities rooted in the digitization and scholarly use of cultural heritage materials, beginning with the launch of the HUMI Project in 1996. Since 2001, DH-related teaching at Keio has expanded from undergraduate courses and postgraduate XML edition projects to graduate-level education. This institutional history should be understood against the broader background of Japanese DH, which, unlike Western contexts, where TEI has been a foundational technology of the DH ecosystem, has been characterized by a long "image-centered" period, due to the significant technical challenges of creating text data of East Asian scripts. Even before the recent advances in character recognition technologies, TEI had begun to gain wider visibility and use in Japan. More recently, those technological advances have made large-scale East Asian text data increasingly accessible.

Reflecting this shift, in these two years, Keio’s DH education has begun to shift from digitization-centered activities toward a more explicit engagement with text encoding. TEI-oriented instruction now helps students understand humanities materials as structured, shareable, and reusable research data, rather than only as images or archival objects.

This poster reports on the emerging transition from rare materials digitization to TEI practice. It focuses on the development of a learning and practice environment in which text encoding is connected to coursework, workshops, international exchange, and early-career researcher training. It also introduces TEIKeM, a newly established initiative at Keio Museum Commons, which aims to provide an institutional setting for sustaining TEI-related education and practice beyond individual courses.

Rather than presenting a specific TEI data model or textbook, this poster examines how TEI practice can be embedded within a broader Digital Humanities ecosystem.

The Apocalypse of Elijah and the Gospel of Judas are among the most consequential non-canonical writings preserved in Coptic, the latest stage of the Egyptian language, written in a Greek-derived alphabet and attested in several dialects (notably Sahidic, Bohairic, Akhmimic, Lycopolitan, Fayyumic). The Apocalypse of Elijah, an Egyptian Christian apocalypse possibly drawing on earlier Jewish material, survives in Akhmimic (P. Heid. Kopt. 600), Sahidic (notably the Chester Beatty codex), and Greek fragments, mostly produced in the fourth to fifth centuries; it offers a rare window onto Egyptian eschatology, the Antichrist figure (the "Son of Lawlessness"), and martyrological discourse under Roman persecution. The Gospel of Judas, recovered in the Sahidic Codex Tchacos and published in 2006, has reshaped scholarship on early "Gnostic" Christianity. Both survive only in codicologically fragile witnesses—ideal yet demanding candidates for TEI encoding.

This poster presents two in-progress TEI P5 editions. Editorial interventions, such as lacunae, restorations, uncertain letters, nomina sacra, scribal corrections, are explicitly marked with <gap>, <supplied>, <unclear>, <damage>, <add>, and <subst>, each with @reason and @cert. Multiple witnesses are collated via <app>/<rdg> against a <listWit> apparatus. The header documents a custom POS taxonomy in <classDecl>, named entities in <listPerson>/<listPlace> linked to Pleiades and Trismegistos, and an explicit Coptic Scriptorium provenance for the linguistic layer.

Every token is wrapped in <w> with part-of-speech (@type: ACAUS, ACONJ, ADV, N, NPROP, V…), Coptic @lemma, and @xml:lang="Greek" on loanwords, generated by the Coptic Scriptorium NLP pipeline and harmonized with our parallel editions of the Gospel of Judas and Pistis Sophia. The Apocalypse of Elijah base text required ~2,000 systematic OCR corrections (ⲛ̄/ⲙ̄ normalization, spurious supralinear strokes stripped, ⲍ↔ϩ and ⲭ↔ϫ confusions resolved against Wintermute's English translation), all transparently recorded in <editorialDecl>.

The poster invites discussion on TEI customizations for under-resourced ancient languages and the philological auditability of OCR-derived editions.

The OG(H)AM project involved harnessing digital tools from different fields to transform scholarly and popular understanding of ogham—an ancient script unique to Ireland and Britain that consists of strokes and notches. There are over 400 examples of large stones with ogham inscriptions from Ireland and Britain. Additionally, there are about two dozen small, portable ogham-bearing objects still extant. Although the original ogham script was probably devised for use on wood, it was later applied to stone. Later still, the writing system was adapted to suit the format of the manuscript page and survives in manuscript sources dating from as early as the ninth century and continuing up to the modern period.

While the majority of evidence for ogham is found in Ireland, there are important clusters of ogham inscriptions found in Britain, predominantly in Wales, Devon and Cornwall, Scotland, and the Isle of Man. Previously, scholarship has studied the ogham evidence from Ireland and Britain independently of each other. The OG(H)AM project was a collaboration between Glasgow and Maynooth universities to produce the first digital corpus of all ogham inscriptions known to date from both Ireland and Britain.

As a three-dimensional writing system, the ogham script poses several interesting challenges for text encoding. Regarding the orientation of the inscriptions: usually ogham is engraved vertically up the edges and horizontally across the top of stone pillars. However, the reading direction may vary for each inscription. Moreover, there are intriguing examples of spiral and circular inscriptions which further complicate interpretation.

The ogham script serves as an invaluable case study for testing the capabilities and limits of text encoding to date. The comparison of ogham evidence from both Ireland and Britain creates connections which significantly enlighten our understanding of this unique writing system and highlights the complex linguistic heritage and cultural exchanges of these neighbouring islands.

At Burnaby Village Museum, we have a collection of ethnographically coded, oral history interview transcripts. We are applying TEI encoding to illustrate and emphasize this thematic analysis of each transcript, rather than descriptive, in-text encoding.

Here are some features of TEI we are making use of:

• Robust metadata to capture the context of the interview.
• We use <category/> for the controlled ethnographic code listing nested under <classDecl> in a hierarchy.

We are using <standOff/> to encode our thematic analyses within each interview. We are using this because:

• In general, each sentence requires the application of several ethnographic codes, at once.
• It is possible to have a paragraph in which all sentences have, for example, four uniform ethnographic codes, while one sentence within the block must be coded with five.
• The addition of new codes in the future is more easily accommodated.

Using the codes, we intend for these TEI encoded files to become:

• A way of searching our oral history collection for granular themes within lines and utterances.
• A way of reporting on the recurrence and nature of the content across the oral history collection.
• Providing an example for other oral history scholars to make use of and render in the future.

Things still being considered:

• This method relies heavily on the transcript line numbers for codes, and therefore each sentence of the transcript must be TEI encoded.
• The <standOff/> notation lies outside content blocks at the end of the file and is therefore difficult to read manually.
• We must integrate XQuery to make full use of the potential of cross-document analysis.
• We are considering how to store these files with the Museum’s existing databases, for continuity of the project.

Within the digital humanities and cultural heritage sectors, the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) has expanded public access to primary sources, breaking down the financial and physical barriers of traditional scholarly editions. However, within both this democratization effort and the popular FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) data paradigm, the term "accessibility" typically refers to either broad public dissemination or to machine-retrievable data. Accessibility for people with disabilities remains somewhat overlooked in DH research (Pirrone et al, 2023) and the complex interactive user interfaces of TEI-powered digital editions are often a hindrance to web accessibility.

Nonetheless, TEI is by design well positioned to facilitate web accessibility through its semantic markup. Granular encoding provides a somewhat untapped opportunity to make digital scholarly editions more accessible thanks to rich encoding rather than despite their complexity.

This poster will showcase preliminary experimentation in this direction at the Scholarly Editing open access journal. The journal publishes small scale TEI-powered digital scholarly editions focused on recovering and expanding access to suppressed, appropriated, or understudied material text. Starting with Vol 43, published in 2026, Scholarly Editing micro-editions are compliant with WCAG 2.1 Level AA and with the Americans with Disabilities Act Title II Regulations. They also experiment with surfacing editorial (such as <supplied> , <corr>) and semantic (such as <persName>) markup to screen readers and keyboard navigation relying directly on TEI data in HTML5 custom elements via CETEIcean (Cayless and Viglianti 2018).

References:

• Pirrone, Maria, et al. “Digital Humanities and Disability: A Systematic Literature Review of Cultural Accessibility for People with Disability. ” Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, vol. 38, no. 1, Apr. 2023, pp. 313–29, https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqac045.
• Cayless, Hugh, and Raffaele Viglianti. “CETEIcean: TEI in the Browser. ” In Proceedings of Balisage: The Markup Conference 2018, vol. 21 (2018). https://doi.org/10.4242/BalisageVol21.Cayless01.

Waka literature, one of the major genres of classical Japanese literature, is a verse form consisting of five phrases in a 5-7-5-7-7 moraic pattern.

Waka have often been handed down as anthologies, following the model of Kokin Wakashū established in the early 10th century. Waka anthologies normally include contextual information before and after each poem, for example, Kotobagaki (headnotes, explaining the context), Kadai (poetry themes), and authorship, according to standardized formats. In recent years, foundational research into structuring TEI-compliant text data for Waka literature based on these traditional formats has progressed, and several texts have been made publicly available.

However, there has been insufficient investigation into the markup of the vocabulary that forms the core of Waka expression. This specialized vocabulary, known as Utakotoba (Waka poetic vocabulary), is a crucial element that carries specific imagery and rhetorical functions within the linguistic space of Waka. In the commercial database currently used by many researchers, it is difficult to investigate the vocabulary based on the meaning, because search function of the database typically rely on simple keyword matching. Furthermore, dictionaries and indexes for Utakotoba are available only in print, with no free, open-access databases.

As a case study of how to solve these problems, this presentation proposes a TEI-compliant markup method for Utakotoba, using the Shōji Godo Hyakushu (The second of two anthologies of one hundred Waka poems compiled during the Shōji era in the early 13th century). Furthermore, with the aim of compiling a dictionary of Utakotoba linked directly to the Waka text, this proposes a method for structuring vocabulary entries and their contents as data in accordance with the TEI Guidelines by classifying the vocabularies based on meaning, assigning unique XML IDs.

This poster presents a series of experiments in LLM-assisted TEI P5 annotation carried out on Johann Friedrich Blumenbach’s “Handbuch der Naturgeschichte” within the broader context of Blumenbach-Online, a long-running digital edition and cultural heritage project at the Academy of Sciences and Humanities in Göttingen. The project has demonstrated both the scholarly value and the practical limits of deeply manual TEI workflows: while expert encoding ensures high semantic precision, it is costly, slow, and difficult to scale across large corpora of editions, translations, and related materials. Therefore we argue for hybrid workflows combining expert review with computational assistance.

Our poster concentrates on experiments in which a selection of large language models was used to support Level 5 semantic markup of an eighteenth-century German text from the Natural History domain. The task included identifying and encoding persons, places, and natural-historical objects in TEI P5 XML; assigning authority links for persons (GND) and places (Getty TGN); generating stable IDs for recurring natural-historical entities and validating output against a project-specific Relax NG Compact schema. The quality of the outputs was assessed using a multi-dimensional evaluation framework against the human-guided annotations. Experiments showed that the LLMs were useful in their ability to follow custom TEI schema rules, given the proper few-shot examples. Zero-shot prompting however, led to non-compliant XML outputs. At the same time, the workflow also exposed typical weaknesses of generative systems: limited context windows, overfitting and occasional hallucinatory references.

The results suggest that LLMs are most productive not as autonomous encoders, but as interactive editorial assistants embedded in a tightly constrained TEI workflow. In this model, LLMs improve recall and accelerate exploratory markup, while scholarly supervision remains essential for validation, disambiguation, and epistemically responsible encoding. We argue that such hybrid workflows can create help new connections and encoding in efficient and productive ways.

Scope of the workshop

This half-day workshop will introduce strategies for working with TEI with minimal resources at one’s disposal. We will discuss low-cost, low-infrastructure, and low-threshold solutions for getting started with TEI projects from authoring to publishing, with the inclusion of other related XML formats such as MEI and MathML or also LaTeX-based MathJax.

In particular, attendees will be first introduced to using the free code editor Visual Studio Code with the extension Scholarly XML. First released in 2020 and greatly updated in 2025, Scholarly XML (https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=raffazizzi.sxml) has provided a lightweight and easy-to-use solution for simple TEI encoding work, such as RELAX NG and Schematron validation, and schema-aware suggestions. Attendees will also be introduced to CETEIcean as a way of publishing TEI with minimal (or no) transformation (Cayless and Viglianti 2018). The main focus of the workshop will be learning how this approach can be used to generate simple static pages to be hosted on free services such as GitHub or Netlify. This workshop is aimed at attendees of all technical levels, including those who do not typically write code, as well as those who already have some programming experience and are interested in learning a leaner approach to TEI work.

Motivation

Digital humanities projects that result in the creation of digital output—typically a website— are prone to what Smithies et al. call the “digital entropy of software and digital infrastructure” (2019). Static sites have become a common choice for archiving legacy projects that risk going offline (Smithies et al. 2019, Summers 2016) because they only require the absolute minimum from hosting infrastructure: a server to distribute documents at a given address. The Endings project at the University of Victoria, British Columbia (https://endings.uvic.ca/), for example, recommends static sites as a viable strategy for ensuring the longevity of Digital Humanities project publications. When projects decay, “[t]hose in charge of infrastructure are also determining, particularly in the long term, the scholarly worth of a project, whether it should remain online, and in what form” (Viglianti and del Rio Riande, 2025). In this perspective, static sites can also function as a component in a plan of 'graceful degradation'. In this workshop, we want to explore and discuss how much TEI users and DH-project researchers and maintainers can do without relying on costly and unreliable infrastructure. The same lightweight infrastructures that support graceful degradation and long-term accessibility are also attractive for researchers with limited technical support or financial resources. This workshop therefore approaches sustainability not as a concern that emerges at the end of a project, but as a design principle that can inform TEI workflows from the outset.

Schedule and requirements

After an introduction to the motivations for this workshop, we will cover the following topics:

• Installing and using Scholarly XML extension for VS Code for authoring and validating TEI.

• Setting up CETEIcean in a simple web page.

• Exploring multimodal examples using additional libraries such as Verovio (MEI) and MathJax (LaTeX), as well as browser-compatible formats such as MathML and SVG.

• Publishing on GitHub pages and Netlify.

• Discussion of sustainability, graceful degradation, and long-term maintenance of TEI publications.

• Show and tell: Participants are invited to present and discuss their own lightweight publishing strategies. We’d love to see your approach!

Example TEI documents will be provided. Attendees are encouraged to bring their own TEI to work with.

Participants must bring their own laptop and be able to install (free) software on it. Internet access will be required. The tutors will require a projector.

References

Cayless, Hugh, and Raffaele Viglianti. “CETEIcean: TEI in the Browser.” Presented at Balisage: The Markup Conference 2018, Washington, DC, July 31 - August 3, 2018. In Proceedings of Balisage: The Markup Conference 2018. Balisage Series on Markup Technologies, vol. 21 (2018). https://doi.org/10.4242/BalisageVol21.Cayless01.

Smithies, James, Carina Westling, Anna-Maria Sichani, Pam Mellen, and Arianna Ciula. 2019. “Managing 100 Digital Humanities Projects: Digital Scholarship & Archiving in King’s Digital Lab.” Digital Humanities Quarterly 013 (1).

Viglianti, Raffaele, and Gimena del Rio Riande. 2025. Against infrastructure: global approaches to digital scholarly editing in “Digital editing and publishing in the twenty-first century” eds. James O'Sullivan et al. Scottish University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.62637/sup.GHST9020.4

The LEAF Commons Tool Suite

This half-day workshop introduces textual scholars and practitioners to the LEAF Commons tool suite (https://www.leaf-vre.org/docs/about-leaf/leaf-commons), a set of web-based, modular, easy-to-use tools supporting text encoding, named entity recognition, web annotation, text analysis and publication without users having to learn markup/coding languages, and support easy movement between interoperable tools. This freely available suite of tools supports digital scholarly workflows for the collaborative production and publication of scholarly and documentary editions, and collections on the web, without the need for software installation. The LEAF Commons suite enables the use of individual tools for specific purposes, or supports an end-to-end workflow from transcription to publication allowing it to serve a wide range of research and pedagogical uses. This workshop will introduce the tools, features and functionality, integrate training materials in multiple languages, and encourage participants to think critically about how the LEAF Commons tools might help TEI2026 participants make good choices about their own workflows.

LEAF stands for the Linked Editing Academic Framework, a collaborative software suite that provides a set of modular tools for text editing and publication.(https://www.leaf-vre.org/) The LEAF Commons tools constitute an accessible, low-barrier, no-cost infrastructure for researchers to produce online texts, editions, or collections, whether for teaching or for undertaking research and collaboration on a sustainable basis. The LEAF Commons tools are freely available in the browser, enabling collaboration and publication through Github, in addition to permitting local storage or installation in a local stack. The LEAF Commons tools promote reuse of data methodologies in keeping with the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) data principles, LEAF uses open-source software, open-access platforms, and open international standards for best practices in text-encoding (TEI-XML – https://tei-c.org) and web annotation (RDF – https://www.w3.org/RDF/).

LEAF promotes best practices, reuse, and sustainability in the production of digital scholarship in the humanities through tools designed to bridge the gap between scholars with (en)coding experience, and those who do not. LEAF Commons offers communities of researchers, teachers, and students the opportunity to take part in digital knowledge production and open collaboration. The workshop will end with open discussion about pursuing such forms of open knowledge production and collaboration.

LEAF-Writer: (https://leaf-writer.leaf-vre.org/) an open-source, open-access multi-lingual Extensible Markup Language (XML) editor that runs in a web browser and offers scholars and their students a rich textual editing experience without the need to download, install, and configure proprietary software, pay ongoing subscription fees, or learn complex coding languages. This user-friendly editing environment incorporates Text Encoding Initiatives (TEI) and Resource Description Framework (RDF) standards. It incorporates reconciliation with linked open data identifiers and project-specific authorities as part of the encoding process. LEAF-Writer is particularly valuable in pedagogical contexts, enabling instructors to teach students good encoding practices without also needing to teach students coding or installing software locally.

LEAF-TE: (The LEAF Turning Engine – https://www.leaf-vre.org/docs/features/leaf-te) is a headless API that enables users to easily and automatically transform documents between formats. It converts HTR/OCR output and MS Word to TEI-XML for importing into LEAF-Writer. It also exports from LEAF-Writer to HTML, Markdown, RDF, CSV, and plain text for exporting encoded texts for publishing, analysis, and preparing for linking textual data.

NERVE: (the Named Entity Relationship and Vetting Environment – https://nerve.lincsproject.ca/) is an application that performs Named Entity Recognition (NER) on machine-readable texts, allowing users to identify candidate entities in a document, review, and correct the results, to produce both TEI markup and/or Linked Open Data (LOD) Web Annotations. Users can export their reconciled data in TEI-XML or JSON formats to an online repository or to their desktop. NERVE can be used in conjunction with LEAF-Writer, or as a stand-alone tool.

DToC: (the Dynamic Table of Contexts – https://www.leaf-vre.org/docs/features/dtoc) provides an online interactive reading and publication environment for digital scholarly texts where the two conventional overviews provided in print editions - the table of contents and the index - have been dynamically merged to provide an interactive online e-reading experience that leverages the power of XML markup. Users can build a DToC edition from one or more TEI-XML files, then curate and label the underlying elements and attributes in order to understand where named entities, topics, and concepts can be traced within the edition. Editions can be stored using URLs and shared with readers as published or teaching texts.

Requirements and Availabilities:

Participants will need a web-enabled laptop computer (not a tablet or a mobile device). No software installation is required. Sample texts in multiple languages will be provided, which participants will continue to have access to after the workshop; participants can also test their own documents in TEI-conformant XML.

Topic: “Schematron in ODD”: Using Schematron in <constraintSpec> in TEI customizaitons to constrain your TEI documents in ways that are difficult or impossible to express in PureODD without <constraintSpec>.
Objective: Participants should leave the workshop with at least a working knowledge of the basics of Schematron,¹ XPath,² how these are used in an ODD customization, and a list of resources for learning more. With luck, participants (at least those who arrive with a TEI customization and the desire to add some difficult constraints to it) will leave with TEI ODD files that generate Schematron that performs the checks they would like their project data to pass.
Appeal to the community: I have no idea if community members will find this appealing or not. I know for sure they *should* find it very appealing, but a) most people may already know this stuff, and b) many people may not realize how important it is. That said, I think it is pretty easy to make the argument that

• catching errors in your encoding earlier is better
• thus catching errors in your customized TEI schema is a good thing
• there are lots of errors to be caught that are difficult or impossible to catch using PureODD without <constraintSpec>.

A great example of this is checking that the value of @ref attributes of <persName> point to a <person>, and that those of <title> elements point to a <bibl>. PureODD simply cannot do that on its own. Another is ensuring that each <sic> element is either a) in a <choice> that itself has exactly one <sic> child and exactly one <corr> child OR is a child of an <fw type="catch">. This can be done in PureODD, but is quite difficult,³ and the resulting error messages are likely to be a somewhat cryptic. (Whereas using Schematron you write your own error messages.)
This workshop will start with an ~½-hour talk on Schematron, what it is, and how it fits into ODD, followed by an ~½-hour introduction to XPath (this part will be ditched if all participants are already comfortable with XPath). It will then quickly progress to a hands-on practice session with participants writing Schematron in an ODD to solve an assigned constraint. The rest (and hopefully most) of the time will be spent with participants working with their own ODDs creating and applying constraints needed for their own data.
Prerequisites:

• Participants should be familiar with ODD, at least in a “I download it from Roma” kinda way.
• The more XPath participants know, the better.
• Participants should arrive with the capability to generate RELAX NG and Schematron schemas from their customization ODDs. (Typically this would mean using Roma or oXygen, but TEI Garage or commandline or anything else is fine, too. But we do not want to spend class time setting folks up for generating schemas. If a prospective participant is having trouble with that, I would be willing to meet (virtually) with them in early–mid July.)
• Participants should arrive with the capability to validate their TEI documents against both RELAX NG and Schematron. (oXygen will do, but any other method is fine, too — I use jing and a front-end to SchXslt2 on the commandline, myself.)

Notes
¹ That is, the basic idea that Schematron gives us the ability to select a bunch of nodes from the tree, and for each one ask “starting from this particular node, is this XPath true?”, and to issue a message if the answer is “no”. I.e., <sch:rule>, @context, <sch:assert>, <sch:report>, @test, <sch:value-of>, and <sch:variable>. More advanced topics like phases, abstract patterns, and diagnotics will not be covered, or only discussed if a question comes up to which they are the best answer.
² That is, the basic XPath required to perform simple tree navigation in a TEI document: axis, paths, steps, predicates, and some functions and operators; and (for testing), the concept that if an XPath returns one or more nodes it counts as true(); if it returns zero nodes it counts as false().
³ You need to remove <sic> from both model classes it is in, and add it back to the content models of <choice> and <fw> manually. In the case of <choice> this is not particularly difficult — ( ( sic, corr) | ( corr, sic ) | ( model.choicePart, model.choicePart+ ) ). But for <fw> you have to create *two* entire specifications for <fw>, one for when @type is "catch" and another for when it is not.