TEI on the whole distinguishes between scribal and editorial interventions
(ADD vs SUPPLIED, DEL vs GAP), but CORR is intended for both.
This virtually makes it necessary to always give the RESP attribute with
CORR in order to properly distinguish between scribal and editorial
corrections , and I have (at least for the duration of our project) made it
I am getting a bit tired of that lengthy 'corr resp="transcr"', 'corr
Also I would like to carry the scribal/editorial distinction into the area
of corrections, for shortness' sake and to make it harder for mistakes to
So, I am about to add an element EM for emendations, ie editorial
corrections, with the resp-attribute giving the one responsible for the
This leaves me with two avenues of what to do with CORR:
The first would be to restrict it to scribal corrections. In that case,
however, CORR's attributes would - confusingly - differ from those of ADD
and DEL (where HAND = the one making the correction, and RESP = the one who
identifies the hand, not who makes the correction).
Now the - so far theoretical - question: Would it be a sacrilege (ie,
detrimental to the conformance of our TEI documents) to add a HAND attribute
to CORR, and ***re-dedicate the RESP attribute of CORR to the purpose of
recording the one who identifies the correcting hand***?
The other possibility - and actually the one I'm tending to - would be to
completely suppress CORR, and instead introduce for scribal corrections a
new element (say, COR), with attributes similar to those of ADD and DEL.
The basic question behind this posting is: How far can one bend the
Guidelines without bringing down the wrath of the TEI gods?
Is re-dedicating an attribute a mortal, or just a venial, TEI-sin?
To sum up: the targeted markup would be:
SCRIBAL EDITORIAL PURPOSE
add supplied additions
del gap omissions
cor(r) em corrections