Representing information for the starting/ending/standalone parts

Hi everyone,

As you know we have two representations of span-like codes:

1) <sc> and <ec> that represent the start code and the ending code. Useful when segmentation breaks up spans, for overlapping spans, etc.

2) <pc> that represent the same think, but in a XML-friendly way, so that can be used when the span-like inline code is well-formed.

We have several attributes that are store the same type of information for both the start part and the end part.

Here is an example:

It shows the four types of representations we have, and the optional display information. That information may be different for the starting and ending parts.

a) Use the same attribute name as much as possible, and have a "special" one for the ending part when used in the <pc> element?

<ph id='1' disp="[br/]"/>
<sc rid='1' disp="[b]"/>
<ec id='1' disp="[/b]"/>
<pc id='1' disp="[b]" dispEnd="[/b]"/>


b) Variation of a) but using two different attribute for <pc> to be a bit clearer? [this is the one we have been using so far]

<ph id='1' disp="[br/]"/>
<sc id='1' disp="[b]"/>
<ec id='1' disp="[/b]"/>
<pc id='1' dispStart="[b]" dispEnd="[/b]"/>


c) Use different attributes depending on each element's type of representation?

<ph id='1' disp="[br/]"/>
<sc id='1' dispStart="[b]"/>
<ec id='1' dispEnd="[/b]"/>
<pc id='1' dispStart="[b]" dispend="[/b]"/>


This would be applicable to the four following information:

- disp (alternative display)
- equiv (text equivalent)
- nid (reference to original data)
- subFlows (points to sub-flows)

The names can be worked out ('nid' e.g. is pretty bad), but I'd like to get a consensus on the concept to use.

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
-ys