Bowerbird wrote:
scott said:
As others have noted, HTML or the newer XHTML is ideal here.
"ideal"? i think not.
XHTML is certainly not the best XML-based vocabulary for marking up books. A carefully selected subset of TEI is much better. Both are used in the context of XML. XHTML can be adapted to books (and is.) If XHTML is used in a major way to markup books, it makes sense to come up with a standardized set of pre-defined classes to identify text structures and content semantics. At this point, though, it still makes more sense to switch to TEI. This is apparently what DP plans to do.
indeed, to the direct contrary, i believe that heavy markup makes on-the-fly adding of annotations _extremely_ difficult.
How is that? Annotations can be linked to the text using the markup as "hooks" (e.g., using XPointer.) The more markup there is, the more hooks to latch onto.
but, as i said, if you can show me some examples, ones that make it as simple as you make it sound, i am open to being convinced otherwise...
XPointer provides an XML-based standard to point to any spot in an XML document. Pointing to 'id' ("fragment identifiers") is the most robust and can survive various types of document edits. In plain text systems, where annotations have to hook to the content itself (rather than markup which is separate from the content), it is more difficult to prevent link breakage. Jon