csprd03 - glossary reference vs candidate reference

In section "5.2 Glossary Module", the ref attribute on <glossEntry> and <translation> is optional.

I assume this is to allow list of terms without associating them explicitly with their occurrence in the content.

This is different from the ref attribute in the Translation Candidates module. Is there a reason for it? That is: Couldn't the
translation candidates be also just listed rather than directly pointed to their corresponding text?

It seems the two modules use the same referencing mechanism but inconsistently.

I'm not necessarily asking for a change, but for a clarification.

-yves