We need to modify the pipeline so that we add @xml:id instead of @n

[ryderwishart]

No description provided.

[klosoter]

I talked with @jonathanrobie earlier and we decided to change Node/@xml:id into Node/@n while keeping m/@xml:id because the duplicate ids create problems for some xml parsers. Does this create problems for you, @ryderwishart, at the front-end?

This has already been changed for the pull request that contains the glosses and stuff, but if we want to keep this change, we might need to change the pipeline accordingly.

[ryderwishart]

I think that shouldn't create any issues. I could always adapt the lowfat accordingly if it did. Thanks for the heads up!

[jonathanrobie]

because the duplicate ids create problems for some xml parsers

For all XML parsers that conform to the xml:id specification, to be precise, since the same xml:id occurs on both (1) the Node and (2) the <m> element.