Elli Mylonas wrote:
> We have proposed that <material> have an "@ref" on SF.
> James suggests that @cref be made global, and replaced on the two
> elements on which it appears. having this as a globally availably
> attribute isn't a bad idea. It certainly solves this problem.
> I don't quite understand the difference between @cref and @ref, but am
> willing to learn.
To be clear what I actually said at http://sn.im/tei-fr&aid=2811234 was:
"<material> here seems to be being used sort of like a specialised type
of <term>. On <gloss> and <term> we have a data.pointer @cref which on
<ref> and <ptr> is data.word. *confusing*
I'd propose that we remove @cref from <gloss> and <term> and add them to
att.canonical (giving them @ref), and also add <material> and if created
<object> to att.canonical as well."
Adding <gloss>, <term>, <material> and <object> to att.canonical makes
some sort of sense to me. Making @ref or @cref global doesn't. I was
worried because @cref sometimes is a pointer and sometimes it is
data.word (to allow things like 'Matt12:34').
I see no reason to abolish cref, just to use it for what was intended
for, which in my mind is non-URI-based canonical references.
Dr James Cummings, Research Technologies Service, University of Oxford
James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk