Print

Print


I am using @cRef with CITE/CTS URNs to encode that a passage from the 
medieval manuscript I am encoding has a specific passage of Priscian as 
source:
<ref cRef="urn:cts:latinLit:stoa0234a.stoa001:2.53.8-2.53.12" type="source">

Should I switch to the <prefixDef> mechanism too?

Paolo


Il 12/06/2016 14:29, Lou Burnard ha scritto:
> Yes, and no.... it rather depends whether "#vergil-aenide" is a valid
> URI in your document.
>
> Sent from my Honor Mobile
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: cRef usage
> From: Thierry Pellé
> To: [log in to unmask]
> CC:
>
> Hello,
>          short, fast and lousy but useful ! ;-)
>
> Hence, if I understand well, I may define
> <prefixDef ident="cref:"
>   matchPattern="(.+?), (.+?)"
>   replacementPattern="#$1-$2">
>   <p>
>          Replaces cRef references.
>   </p>
> </prefixDef>
>
> and then use
> <quote ref="cref:Virgile, Enéide">
>   ...
> </quote>
>
> That sounds good.
>
> Thank you!
> Thierry
>
> Le dimanche 12 juin 2016 à 08:00 -0400, Syd Bauman a écrit :
>> [Fast-and-lousy response from an airport.]
>>
>> The @cRef mechanism has essentially been superceded by the
>> <prefixDef> mechanism, which can be used on any pointer.
>>
>> >     Guidelines specifies that @cRef "specifies the destination of
>> >     the pointer by supplying a canonical reference". I wonder why
>> >     only gloss, ptr, ref, term provide such a canonical forme for a
>> >     pointer. For instance, why is it not possible to specifies the
>> >     @souce attribute of a quote as a canonical pointer?