Apologies for the rather elliptical nature of my earlier comment on this
thread.... the point I was trying to make, and which the note probably ought to
elaborate, is that in the case where ALL THERE IS is an illegible deletion, then
it is perfectly kosher to record this by using just a <gap/> -- and indeed that
this is recommended, for the sakje of economy in encoding. In the case wheree
part of a deletion is legible and another part is not, and in Dot's case where
it is desired to indicate that there is a substitution, it makes perfectly good
sense to wrap the <gap/> inside a <del/>. 

In message <[log in to unmask]> Gabriel Bodard
<[log in to unmask]> writes:
> Dear Dot,
> 
> I agree with you that the correct way to tag this would be 
> <del><gap/></del> (and this was concluded in a discussion on the MS-SIG 
> list a year or so ago, I think).
> 
> One argument is, as you say, that in the case of erasure and replacement 
> text, the <subst> element doesn't (and shouldn't) allow <gap/>.
> 
> <del><gap/></del> doesn't of course mean that someone has deleted a gap, 
> (any more than <name><gap/></name> would mean that someone's name was a 
> gap) it means that some text has been erased, but that we are not able 
> to transcribe that text because it is illegible. In other words, the 
> <del> and the <gap/> are encoding different classes of information: 
> <del> is an action that has been taken by the original scribe (or a 
> later hand) and contributes to the state of the text we have; <gap/> is 
> an admission by the modern editor that she cannot read the text. I'd 
> argue that it's best not to confuse the two things.
> 
> Anyway, I think the wording of the passage in the Guidelines you cite 
> should be modified. The note on <del> is correct.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Gabby
> 
> Dot Porter a écrit :
> > Hello everyone,
> > 
> > I'm looking at how to encode deleted text that is not legible (in this
> > case, because the overstrike has obliterated it completely).
> > 
> > In the "Note" section of the index entry for <del>, I read:
> > 
> > The text deleted must be at least partially legible, in order for the
> > encoder to be able to transcribe it. *Illegible text within a deletion
> > may be marked using the gap tag to signal that text is present but has
> > not been transcribed. Attributes on the gap  element may be used to
> > indicate how much text is omitted, the reason for omitting it, etc.*
> > 
> > Which means I could do something like:
> > 
> > <del rend="overstrike"><gap reason="illegible"/></del>
> > 
> > However, in section 3.4 of the Guidelines I read:
> > 
> > *The del element should not be used where the deletion is such that
> > material cannot be read with confidence, or read at all, or where the
> > material has been omitted by the transcriber or editor for some other
> > reason.* ... *Where material has been omitted by the transcriber or
> > editor, this may be indicated by use of the gap element.*
> > 
> > I'm confused. Perhaps the "Note" is not clear, and does not in fact
> > mean that <gap> may be used inside <del>? Could be that "illegible
> > text *within a deletion*" is what is throwing me off.
> > 
> > I'd like to use <subst> to indicate that an addition is substituting
> > for a deletion, so I can't really use <gap> on its own, to indicate
> > the deletion (<gap> is apparently not allowed in <subst>). So
> > <del><gap/></del> would be ideal, if it is allowed.
> > 
> > (Although to be pedantic about it: of course "deleting a gap" doesn't
> > really make sense. But I need some way to indicate that I can't read
> > the text that is deleted, and <gap/> seems to be the tag.)
> > 
> > Any suggestions or thoughts? Is there something simple that I'm overlooking?
> > 
> > Dot
> 
> -- 
> Dr Gabriel BODARD
> (Epigrapher & Digital Classicist)
> 
> Centre for Computing in the Humanities
> King's College London
> 26-29 Drury Lane
> London WC2B 5RL
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
> Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980
> 
> http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
> http://www.currentepigraphy.org/