Currently, the SIG is working on a document called Guidelines for the creation of TEI documents that will map well to ontologies such as the CIDOC-CRM.
The Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative is the official journal of the Text Encoding Initiative Consortium. It will publish the proceedings of the annual TEI Members Meeting and Conference and special issues based on topics or themes of interest to the community or in conjunction with special events or meetings associated with TEI. Its contents will be rigorously peer-reviewed.
TEI is XML based, and thus it suffers heavy limitations, such as overlapping annotations. RDF is able to overcome this, using ontology vocabularies and allowing powerful queries.
En RDF, la logique structurelle est toujours la même, puisqu'elle est intrinsèque au modèle : <Sujet> <Prédicat> <Objet>. La validation « structurelle » de RDF se situe donc au niveau de l'assertion ou de la donnée à la différence de XML dont la validation est documentaire. En réalité, RDF ne s'intéresse pas à l'encodage d'une structure, mais plutôt à celui de la logique des données. C'est là que rentrent en jeu les ontologies.
Unlike the Dublin Core element set, the TEI Header is not designed specifically for describing and locating objects on the web, although it can be used for this purpose.
As I see it, TEI is for describing the elements of a document; transforming to HTML with RDFa can add a meaningful interpretative layer, stating what the document is saying about the external world.
RDF and Topic Maps may appear to address this problem (they are after all specifications for expressing “semantic relations,” and they both have XML transfer syntaxes), but in reality their focus is on generic semantics — propositions about the real world — and not the semantics of markup languages.
T. Nellhaus. 1, page 257-277. (2001)"It is unclear, however, what relationship there might be between TEI headers and RDF. In principle, it should be feasible to create a crosswalk...".