PWG reference markup

[gasyoun]

http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/PWGScan/2013/web/webtc/indexcaller.php aja

In ; vgl. 2. aja 3. Colebr. Misc. Ess. I, 348. Ind. St. I, 428 , N. the 3. is marked as part of the reference, but it is not. Is Colebr. Misc. Ess. I, 348. Ind. St. I, 428 not recognized as a quote because of that?

Why is Sûrjas. 2, 45. 13, 11. a hyperlinked reference and Sâmavidh. Br. 1, 1, 17; vgl. Ṛv. Anukr. is not? vgl. should be demarked in all such cases, it's just = compare, vide. In that case will Sâmavidh. Br. 1, 1, 17 and Ṛv. Anukr. be found?

[gasyoun]

@funderburkjim can we touch it and still not kill everything?

[funderburkjim]

There are two kinds of problems:

• vgl. This is a markup problem. The current markup makes 'vgl.' occur within the scope of the samavidh.br. reference. That is an error correctable by a change in digitization (a typo)
• no link for samavidh.br. This is because there is no literary source mentioned in the PWG bibliographies that matches samavidh.br. If you know what that reference should be, we could add it.

Also, I am unsure whether Rv.anukr. is two literary sources or one.

I'll probably tackle the meta-line/iast conversion of PWG in a couple of weeks.

[SergeA]

"Sāmav.Br." = Sāmavidhāna- (Sāmavidhi-) Brāhmaṇa "Ṛv.Anukr." = Ṛgveda- Anukramaṇī (Anukramaṇikā)

[funderburkjim]

"Ṛv.Anukr." = Ṛgveda- Anukramaṇī (Anukramaṇikā)

In the PWG bibliography, there is an entry for Anukr.

And of course there is an entry for Ṛv.

However, the entry for the word Anukramaṇikā in MW suggests that this word is a generic name for a particular kind of document (rather than the name of a specific document):

anu-kramaṇikā [p= 31] : f. a table or chapter of contents, index to a collection of Vedic hymns (giving the first word of each hymn, the number of verses, name and family of poets, names of deities and metres). [L=6160]

There is no bibliographic entry for Ṛv.Anukr. (which I would take to be the anu-kramaṇikā particular to the Ṛgveda.)

So there are two ways to interpret Ṛv.Anukr.

• Ṛv. Anukr. (with a space), which would mean two separate links to the existing bibliographic entries
• Ṛv.Anukr. (without space), which would mean an undocumented bibliographic entry which we could add to the printed bibliographic entries with the name Ṛgveda- Anukramaṇī (Anukramaṇikā).

Which is the better solution?

"Sāmav.Br." = Sāmavidhāna- (Sāmavidhi-) Brāhmaṇa

That solution looks fine, and we should fill the gap of the printed Bibliography for this case.

[gasyoun]

Ṛv.Anukr. (without space), which would mean an undocumented bibliographic entry

Sure.