Update Guidelines Incipit and Explicit

[CarstenHoffmannMarburg]

I updated the guidelines concerning the incipits and explicits as discussed recently in our latest webmeeting. I am not sure, whether the phrase on colophons is useful or should deleted or extended. It might be appropriate to refer to the subpage "colophon", but I did not know, how I can indicate it in a <ref>.

[thea-m]

I would say "20-30 words belonging to the text proper, excluding religious formulas and supplications". I would also generally encode religious formulas and certainly supplications if they include information about persons involved in the manuscript description, but it is important for cataloguers to understand that these do usually not contribute much in identifying the text.

[DenisNosnitsin1970]

The reason not to encode formulas stems from the definition of the incipit/explicit, and from the necessity to avoid the practice when some encode only formulas and stop where the work proper starts, thinking that the incipit is already recorded. There are many cases when the formulas and eulogies have to be dropped for the sake of the proper beginning of the work. We ourselves do that, even more if we want to reduce some limitation on the quoted text. What I say is more or less what Dorothea says, perhaps we need to think a little more on the wording, to express the idea in the clearest possible way.

[CarstenHoffmannMarburg]

One more suggestion to turn the perspective to make it sound less strict (both in incipit and explicit):

"most common formulas and eulogies can be omitted and should then be marked as a gap and ellipsis."