Just thinking aloud...
Brevigraphs might be considered members of a general class called
symbols. For example, some MSS have pictures that represent days of the
month, planets, and so on. They are pictures that represent letters,
words, even phrases--a bit like hieroglyphs.
Shorthand and brevigraphs are the same sort of thing. Has anyone ever
converted shorthand documents into TEI? Some shorthand/brevigraph
symbols have much in common with the things they abbreviate at the
character level. Others have nothing in common--they are pictures with
no letters in them at all. The first sort might be transcribed as
<abbr>/<expan> but the second sort needs an image or symbol and pointer
to the equivalent text.
It would be nice to have a TEI <shorthand>/<longhand> pair, where the
content of <shorthand> can be an image or text and the content of
<longhand> is text.
> On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Julia Flanders wrote:
> > The WWP has always treated brevigraphs as a form of abbreviation and encoded
> > them with <abbr>, with an expanded reading encoded on expan=. However, it has
> > just occurred to me that there might be a rationale for treating them instead
> > as a form of old-style typography, and using <orig> with reg= instead. I am
> > curious whether any projects have taken this approach--or does it seem
> > self-evident that they should be treated as a form of abbreviation?