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 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