Stuart Brown wrote:
> Argh! So now I have to be able to write CGI?
yes. whats the big deal in that? call it "web services" if
> And this document is only
> allowed to have working references when it is sat in a sibling directory to
no, you misunderstand
> <doc id="midston" indirectLoc="/cgi-bin/resolver?id-=FOO"><title>Middleton
> Stoney: Excavation and Survey of a North Oxfordshire Parish,
a damned fine book, if I may so so
> The target has been indicated using methods native to XML, I'm pointing to
> an abstraction that represents the document, which just happens to have a
sure, your method is fine. I was not trying to decry some
methods, but there is a spectrum from
- ref->bibliography (a route we have not mentioned yet)
and different methods may suit different circumstances
>>My view is that this is not a TEI-specific problem, and so
>>the TEI should not come up with its own solutions.
> Why not? Expressing concurrency is not a TEI-specific problem, neither is
> feature structures.
no, but we are market leaders in these areas, one could
argue. generalised hypertext is so much bigger than us
> Particularly if you want to promote usage
> of the TEI in a broader, authorial context.
those people just want to say <xref url="..."> :-}
> People like out-of-the-box
> solutions, and they're more likely to use the TEI if you say "here's
> something a lot of people want to do;
in my world (which may be different from others), the
problem _you_ seem to be identifying is one of
bibliographical references, which was solved aeons ago.
> we not making prescriptions here, but
> we suggest you..."
I don't at all disagree with TEI guidelines on many ways to
solve the problem. What I don't want is to start inventing
more and more tags....
Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager
Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431