for me, corr always goes with sic. Typically there is a misspelling which is "corrected" by the editor.
supplied in contrast "corrects" an omission, typically some lacking parts of speech (eg. article or verb).
So, maybe supplied can be seen as a shorthand for <choice><sic/><corr>some editorial addition</corr></choice>?!
All the best
Am 08.05.2012 um 12:22 schrieb Gerrit Brüning:
> Dear all,
> The Guidelines state:
> "Where the transcriber considers that one or more words have been erroneously omitted in the original source and corrects this omission, the <supplied> element discussed in 184.108.40.206 [...] should be used in preference to <corr>." (http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/PH.html#PHCC)
> We must admit to breaking this rule. And I still cannot see why <corr> is wrong, because it seems to me that with <corr> the editor what is ERRONEOUSLY not present in the source, whereas <supplied> is for passages which are not erroneous, but, for example, damaged or deleted.
> What is the right way to go?
> Gerrit Brüning, M.A.
> Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter
> Historisch-kritische Edition von Goethes Faust | Genetic Edition of Goethe's Faust | faustedition.net
> Freies Deutsches Hochstift | Großer Hirschgraben 23-25 | 60311 Frankfurt am Main | Fon +49(0)69-13880-292