leaving notes about a single word in a diplomatic transcriptions

[jeffreycwitt]

I often find myself wanting to leave a little note or comment about a word or phrase in the text to remind myself what I was thinking when I come back to the word.

Right now I do something like this:

   <sic>imperata <!-- looks like "sperata" but the "s" is really an "i" with a line over it --></sic>

I've leaned toward using <sic> simply to say that this is REALLY there in the manuscript. And then I just leave a comment inside the element.

But we could try to standardize this if we thought it was worth the trouble.

We could use:

<sic>imperata<desc>description</desc><sic>

or a variation on this:

<seg>imperata<desc>description</desc><seg>

The advantage of using an XML comment is the basic assurance this comment won't be used in processing. At the present, I really just intend it to be a reminder. Not something I want to be displayed in a final presentational output. Nevertheless, I still want to wrap the comment in a <sic> element in order to clearly associate the comment with the word in question. Thus if I run query for comments later, I can be very clear about what the target of the comment is.

Nevertheless, one larger tension we have to navigate here is the task of simply creating the diplomatic transition and the creation of commentary for that edition. I think it is important that we not let the latter get out of hand because this tends to makes the source text increasingly unmanageable. Commentary can generally be added later in another file or off-set markup as an annotation.

Still, adding commentary to a specific word or small phrase is tricky unless we wrap that word in a <seg>, <sic>, <w> element that contains the commentary as a child.

This might be an issue to save for a 2.0.0 version of the schema. But I wanted to at least record it here.

[nivaca]

There are other options for the tag. Take a look at this example (taken from here):

quamuis

mens iners inres

que nutu dei gesta sunt ...

I reckon the tag, with its “type” attribute, allow for more semantic detail than simply a tag.

Cheers,

Nick

From: jeffreycwitt notifications@github.com Reply-To: lombardpress/lombardpress-schema reply@reply.github.com Date: Monday, May 9, 2016 at 14:38 To: lombardpress/lombardpress-schema lombardpress-schema@noreply.github.com Subject: [lombardpress/lombardpress-schema] leaving notes about a single word in a diplomatic transcriptions (#13)

I often find myself wanting to leave a little note or comment about a word or phrase in the text to remind myself what I was thinking when I come back to the word.

Right now I do something like this:    imperata I've leaned toward using simply to say that this is REALLY there in the manuscript. And then I just leave a comment inside the element.

But we could try to standardize this if we thought it was worth the trouble.

We could use:

imperatadescription or a variation on this: imperatadescription The advantage of using an XML comment is the basic assurance this comment won't be used in processing. At the present, I really just intend it to be a reminder. Not something I want to be displayed in a final presentational output. Nevertheless, I still want to wrap the comment in a element in order to clearly associate the comment with the word in question. Thus if I run query for comments later, I can be very clear about what the target of the comment is. Nevertheless, one larger tension we have to navigate here is the task of simply creating the diplomatic transition and the creation of commentary for that edition. I think it is important that we not let the latter get out of hand because this tends to makes the source text increasingly unmanageable. Commentary can generally be added later in another file or off-set markup as an annotation. Still, adding commentary to a specific word or small phrase is tricky unless we wrap that word in a , , element that contains the commentary as a child. This might be an issue to save for a 2.0.0 version of the schema. But I wanted to at least record it here. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub

[stenskjaer]

I think it would be very interesting to think about an implementation of small comments to a phrase (or maybe especially, a reading). You already have some embedded comments in the apparatus on some of the Lombard Press texts, how did you encode that? I understand the use of <sic>, but also agree with Nick that it also has a different and much more well established use case, that is related to this, but not identical. Would a simple <span> be a possibility?

[jeffreycwitt]

I think <seg> is the TEI equivalent of <span> it just stands for an undefined segment.

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Michael Stenskjær Christensen < notifications@github.com> wrote:

I think it would be very interesting to think about an implementation of small comments to a phrase (or maybe especially, a reading). You already have some embedded comments in the apparatus on some of the Lombard Press texts, how did you encode that? I understand the use of , but also agree with Nick that it also has a different and much more well established use case, that is related to this, but not identical. Would a simple be a possibility?

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/lombardpress/lombardpress-schema/issues/13#issuecomment-218224480

Dr. Jeffrey C. Witt Philosophy Department Loyola University Maryland 4501 N. Charles St. Baltimore, MD 21210 www.jeffreycwitt.com

[jeffreycwitt]

Consensus is that a <note> MAY appear within a <sic> element, the purpose of which is to clarify why the text was marked with <sic>. See issue #144 for an a recommendation to further clarify where <note> elements can appear.

[jeffreycwitt]

Is there any reason this should only apply to a diplomatic transcription? I would like to all include this in a critical transcription. And since <sic> is allowed in a critical transcription it should be allowed in a critical.

[stenskjaer]

I agree 100%.