Tara L Andrews schreef:
> <app xml:id="App481">
> <rdg wit="#Jer #K">
> <rdg wit="#V #Y">
> <witDetail target="#App481" wit="#K" type="punctuation">:</
> <witDetail target="#App481" wit=" #V #Y"
> <rdg wit="#X" type="omission"/>
> which gives the following witnesses:
> Jer: zastoucoy
> K: zastoucoy:
> V: astoucoyn,
> X: (om.)
> Y: astoucoyn,
> So before I go too much farther with this sort of thing, I am
> wondering: is there a generally accepted way to handle punctuation
> variations in text criticism? To handle punctuation at the level of
> semantic markup at all? How have other people done this, if at all?
The witDetail element is synonymous with <note type='witnessDetail'>
(see note in
It is a type of note, and it doesn't seem appropriate to use it to hold
the punctuation, which is a part of the transcribed text.
If for some reason (which I don't quite follow) you don't want it to be
part of the regular rdg elements, you also have the option of using
specialised app elements (app type="punctuation") to hold the
Does that help?