The <hi> problem is something that I’ve also run into, and I’m glad that it has come up; I have dealt with it by using multiple <abbr> or <am> elements with @rend, but this really only works if one is using the EpiDoc style of abbreviation. Before getting into that, I agree that this approach is on the whole much saner (at least for dealing with highly abbreviated medieval manuscripts) than what the guidelines suggest:
> On 17 Feb 2015, at 11:58 AM, Lavrentev Alexey <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> In transcribing primary sources for paleographical purposes it may however be useful to tag precisely the abbreviation including the base character and the abbreviation marker but not the whole word as in this example :
I would wholeheartedly vote for removing the whole-word requirement. This, however, brings us back to the larger problem that (as far as I can tell) there is no standard way of recording abbreviations in TEI. I seem to remember a thread about a year and a half ago in which there were as many as five different ways of indicating the same abbreviation. The two that seem most common are that indicated above, and the style required by EpiDoc (as seen at <http://www.stoa.org/epidoc/gl/latest/trans-abbrevfully.html>), using which the above example would be written like this:
I’ve personally found this much easier to manage, as there is no duplication of the abbreviated text, and fewer tags.
I’d really like to see the community agree on something, whatever specific form it might take, for the next release. There are an increasing number of people considering the use of TEI in their everyday work, and to those in this situation it’s very disheartening to see a lack of standardization for such a basic feature. I’ve known a couple of people who, seeing this situation, gave up on the idea entirely and went back to transcribing manuscripts in Microsoft Word.
Collaborative Program in Editing Medieval Texts
Centre for Medieval Studies
University of Toronto