on rend= and rendRef= (was "Re: Fwd: [tei-council] DRAFT Agenda for ...")

[Syd Bauman]

> > I suppose if it was a choice of @rend *or* @rendRef it would be
> > slightly nicer.
> I tend to agree. I know if I had "@rendref" (as a pointer to a
> tei:rendition), I would probably use it in place of rend
> everywhere.

One of the important uses for having both simultaneously would to be
able to say "this <thing> is rendered just like it says at
#thingRend, *except* that it is also small caps" or whatever. I.e.,
to use rend= to override portions of what is specified by rendRef=.
Or, for example, to have a default rendition for footnotes:
  <rendition xml:id="fnRend">place(foot) align(left)
                             weight(bold) first-indent(1)</rendition>
and then specify the detail of the anchor character on the element
itself: 
  <note rendRef="#fnRend" rend="pre(&dagger;)">quack!</note>


> > What scares me is adding a new attribute to att.global, because
> > it becomes so visible to everyone. What you _could_ have is
> > @rendRef supplied by an optional module, but then what else would
> > that contain?
> 
> That seems reasonable to me. 

Me too, although

a) I don't wonder if rendRef= should be in att.global, and rend=
   should be ostracized for those who want to say a lot of detail
   about rendition;

b) I wonder if the 'transcr' module (can we rename that?) defined by
   chapter "PH-PrimarySources" would be the right place for whichever
   attribute is *not* in global.