本文是邁向創造一個先進的巴利經典與漢文阿含經電子版的第一步。以比較性目錄連接巴漢兩個文獻匯編之後，研究者可以TEl標記符號(markup)記錄其研究結果。透過型式的標記語言，電子版可以標準化且精確的方式告訴讀者某兩個經典的關係。由研究者自己決定記錄的內容、使用的標記語言及標記語言的表達方式。本文1.,2.節敘述用標記符號的原因。按著以兩個例子在3.1及3.2說明比較性研究如何運用標記符號。3.1說明如何使m標記讓所謂的「出現」(occurrence)概念形式化。「出現」代表某一個字、詞或句子是否僅在巴利文或僅在漢文或在兩種文獻皆出現。這種分析，舉例而言，可讓巴利文的讀者知道某一句巴利文在漢文有沒有平行的內容。說明此方法的例子源於《雜阿含經》(大2.99.120b)及相應部(PTS IV, 218)3.2節介紹「內容結構」(content structure)的概念。設計一個敘述內容結構差異的矩陣後，我們可以簡單的以一行標記符號來表現某兩個經典有何種差異。此研究方法可協助研究者從兩經結構性的差異獲得較具體的標誌，以探討巴漢文獻匯編的相同與相與之處。

The present paper is one of the first steps taken towards the design of an advanced digital edition of the Pali Nikaya and the Chinese Agama sutras. After presenting the two text corpora in digital form, and linking them by a comparative catalogue, it is possible to encode comparative research using TEI markup. Through the formalism of the markup language the resulting digital edition would tell the user in a consistent and precise way about certain aspects in the relationship between two sutras. It is the researcher alone who decides what aspects to encode and how precisely to do so. The paper outlines (in 1.& 2.) the notion of markup and the reasons for its use in the present case. Then I offer two examples of how research can be encoded into markup. In 3.1 the occurrence of a word or phrase in the Pali and I or Chinese is treated in a comparative fashion. Fully done, this kind of analysis would enable, e.g. a user of the Pali text to know to what degree literal parallel s to her text exist in Chinese. For an example, we look at a gatha from the Za ahan jing (T2.99.120b) and its parallel in the Satpyutta Nikiiya (PTS IV, 218). In 3.2 the content structure of the Arrow sutra in Chinese and Pali is analysed and compared. The results are encoded by way of one markup line that describes the difference between the sutras according to a previously devised matrix. This perspective allows precise, quantifiable statements of differences between the two corpora as a whole, based on structural differences between sutra versions.