-
Dear @chhomkunthea,
there is a validation issue on this file because of `` identified as a tag:
```
bhay· moya knap· mās· moya ta vraḥ katāṅ· qañ· ge hvatta nā
```
Do you need my help to se…
-
- @ekobastiawan : I have revised and pushed the revised file. Please carry out the next round of revisions, and apply the guidance given in this file also to all your previously encoded files. Let me …
-
Dear @chhomkunthea,
- The first issue regarding this file is located in this chunck
```
958 śaka ṣaṣṭhi roc· qāṣādha sauravāra nu vraḥ kamrateṅ· qañ· śri narendravarmma sruk· danlāṅ· khloñ· mukh…
-
Dear @erc-dharma/nusantara-epigraphy,
Among the changes made in March 2020 in the EG, the prefixes “p” and “m” are no longer necessary (and no longer permitted) in `@loc`; see EG p. 97 for more in…
-
Dear @chhomkunthea,
I found this strange encoding on K. 1247 at the xml line 135:
```
der· tai II ku rok· Iseg pau tai
```
Should `seg` really be inside the ``tag? Can you check it please?
…
-
I am currently encoding a Pallava inscription from Karnataka (see https://github.com/erc-dharma/tfa-pallava-epigraphy/blob/master/texts/xml/tfaPallava252.xml), which was edited in Epigraphia Carnatica…
-
Is it because of data processing that leads to 'ascii' codec can't encode characters, or is it the python version? Eventually, the loss will appear as ‘nan’.
2020-05-31 10:25:19 cfc17c86ba01 train.…
-
Dear all,
At Arlo's request, the automatic system for sigla implemented so far have been taken down. Now, you need to declare it as the content of`@n` on `` in the ``.
For instance, such an enco…
-
Dear all, I have been thinking about the way to refer to the Annual Report on Indian Epigraphy.
I have first looked at the way it was done in EIAD, that is:
```
1962-63: no. B.147
```
D…
-
Dear all,
The Epidoc stylesheets have a display for `` giving ```raḥ(- - -) 3``` for ```raḥ 3```.
Can you let me know if you want to keep this possibility and eventually adapt it to your expectat…