> Would the use of the "corresp" be an alternative and appropriate way
> linking <note> elements in some of the cases identified by Syd Bauman?
> For example:
> <l id="verse12" ana="note55" >this little line of verse<anchor
CORRESP is one of a number of attributes provided by the linking tagset
(others include ANA, SYNCH, COPYOF ...) that add specific semantics to the
basic linking function. In the case of CORRESP the Guidelines are rather coy
about exactly what kind of "correspondence" is intended, but all the
examples (and my own belief) is that it is rather more specific than would
warrant its use simply to link an annotation with its point of attachment.
All the examples I can remember in the Guidelines use it to link
corresponding sentences in a parallel corpus, i.e. where one element exactly
translates another. So my interpretation of the above snippet of markup
"this little line of verse" is analysed in whatever element has the id
"note55". It contains within it a point, and that point has an identifier
anote34. There is some other corresponding point which has identifier
Applying the Gricean maxim that this must be intended to mean *something* I
would hasard a guess that it probably suggests that "note34" identifies a
point on some other set of co-ordinates. It can't be a time sequence (for in
that case the conscientious encoder would have used the SYNCH attribute). So
maybe it is an image map or something, telling me wherabouts on the page
this particular point of the verse line quoted occurs? I suppose I'll just
follow the link and see where it takes me.
Probably the last thing I would expect, is that this would be used to
represent the mundane association of a footnote with a text. For that I
would expect to see one of the several mechanisms explicitly described in
the Guidelines (see section 14.1.2) -- <note> or <ptr>.
So I think the answer to this question is No.