apparently duplicate "principal" and "reference" editions in metadata

[paregorios]

Ticket #245 was originally about this problem, but it has been turned into a discussion of inability to change type of edition in the editor. I am moving the original concern -- which addresses problems in XML data -- to this new ticket so that it doesn't get lost in the shuffle.

I've stumbled across a couple of DCLP XML files in which both of the following appear:

• a "Principal Edition" in a <bibl type="publication" subtype="principal"> and
• a "Reference Edition" in a <bibl type="reference" subtype="principal">

each of which seems to be a citation of the same work. For example, consider TM 92863, where we read:

<div type="bibliography" subtype="principalEdition">
   <listBibl>
      <bibl type="publication" subtype="principal">
         <ptr target="http://papyri.info/biblio/12016"/>
         <biblScope unit="numbers">42</biblScope>
         <!--ignore - start, i.e. SoSOL users may not edit this-->
         <title level="s" type="abbreviated">Suppl.Mag.</title>
         <biblScope unit="volume">1</biblScope>
         <!--ignore - stop-->
      </bibl>
      <bibl type="reference" subtype="principal">
         <ptr target="http://papyri.info/biblio/12016"/>
         <!-- ignore - start, i.e. SoSOL users may not edit this -->
         <title level="m" type="main">Supplementum Magicum. Vol. I (Suppl. Mag. I).</title>
         <author n="1">
            <surname>DANIEL</surname>
            <forename>Robert W.</forename>
         </author>
         <date>1990</date>
         <!-- ignore - stop -->
      </bibl>
   </listBibl>
</div>

Although some particulars differ, you will note that the context work indicated by the <ptr> element is identical in both <bibl>s.

Is this redundancy intentional and desired?

[paregorios]

Other examples can be found. Here's one (TM66470) in which the <bibl type="publication" subtype="principal"> has no <ptr> to a biblio record, but the <bibl type="reference" subtype="principal"> does have a <ptr>. I note further that the one with the <ptr> does not have the volume and item number information, but the one without the <ptr> does incorporate that detail:

<bibl type="publication" subtype="principal">
   <title level="s" type="abbreviated">CLA</title>
   <biblScope unit="volume">3</biblScope>
   <biblScope unit="numbers">369</biblScope>
</bibl>
<bibl type="reference" subtype="principal">
   <ptr target="http://papyri.info/biblio/3761"/>
   <!-- ignore - start, i.e. SoSOL users may not edit this -->
   <title level="m" type="main">Codices Latini Antiquiores. A Palaeographical Guide to Latin Manuscripts prior to the Ninth Century. Part III: Italy: Ancona - Novara.</title>
   <author n="1">
      <surname>Lowe</surname>
      <forename>Elias Avery</forename>
   </author>
   <date>1938</date>
   <!-- ignore - stop -->
</bibl>

[paregorios]

@rla2118 @jcowey @HolgerEssler where this sort of thing occurs (presumably because of oddities in LDAB source or vagaries in the LDAB2EpiDoc crosswalk), is the expectation that users will note the redundancies and clean them up in the editor?

If not, does their need to be some sort of dragnet for these cases and a code cleanup effort organized against the XML?