to be continued

If a project uses standard XML tools and TEI/EpiDoc markup--or if that project has created a translation application to move documents between XML/EpiDoc and their own internal format or database--then sharing documents between projects becomes as simple as telling the software where to find the new file. Manual conversion of data and re-entering of texts will become a thing of the past because there is enough information in the text itself to permit software to make necessary conversion decisions unaided.

Beyond the tremendous benefits to be realized from project-to-project data sharing, individual projects can gain other advantages from adopting EpiDoc techniques. One can imagine a website in which customizable user preferences dictate whether standard glosses for the various division types are presented to or hidden from the user (i.e., a helpful, student-oriented interface vs. a compact, streamlined view for scholars). A search engine packaged with a CDROM of texts could search for date ranges found only in 'description' divisions, for Latin abbreviations found only in 'edition' divisions, or for English words appearing only in 'translation' divisions. In assembling a large database of inscriptions, an automated process could easily be put to the task of reading all the entries from the 'bibliography' divisions of hundreds of individual texts prepared by a number of different projects, then collating the citations into a single master bibliography file for the entire database.

to be continued