12.3.5. att.canonical
| att.canonical provides attributes that can be used to associate a representation such as a name or title with canonical information about the object being named or referenced. [14.1.1. Linking Names and Their Referents] | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Module | tei — Specification | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Members | att.naming[att.personal[forename name orgName persName placeName surname] affiliation author editor education nationality occupation pubPlace residence socecStatus state trait] authority bibl biblStruct catDesc date faith principal publisher resp respStmt term title | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Attributes |
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| Example | In this contrived example, a canonical reference to the same organisation is provided in four different ways.The first presumes the availability of an internet connection and a processor that can resolve a URI (most can). The second requires, in addition, a <prefixDef> that declares how the nzvm prefix should be interpreted. The third does not require an internet connection, but does require that a file named named_entities.xml be in the same directory as the TEI document. The fourth requires that an entire external system for key resolution be available. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Note | The key attribute is more flexible and general-purpose, but its use in interchange requires that documentation about how the key is to be resolved be sent to the recipient of the TEI document. In contrast values of the ref attribute are resolved using the widely accepted protocols for a URI, and thus less documentation, if any, is likely required by the recipient in data interchange. These guidelines provide no semantic basis or suggested precedence when both key and ref are provided. For this reason simultaneous use of both is not recommended unless documentation explaining the use is provided, probably in an ODD customization, for interchange. | ||||||||||||||||||||

