I think the confusion comes from the very begining of "3.4 Simple
editorial changes", which reads :
The tags described in this section may be used to record such editorial
interventions, whether made by the encoder, by the editor of a printed
edition used as a copy text, by earlier editors, or by the copyists of
Le 07/04/2011 17:42, Syd Bauman a écrit :
> Sorry, Torsten, I didn't completely follow your request for changing
> the distinction as discussed in the Guidelines. But I think the
> intent is simple:
> *<choice> and its children<sic> and<corr> are for cases where the
> modern digital editor creating a TEI edition corrects something in
> the source. Thus these elements have nothing to do with your use
> *<subst> and its children<del> and<add> are for cases where the
> document as it is being encoded already has had changes made.
> You may wish to indicate that you (the modern digital editor creating
> a TEI edition) believe that the deletion and addition were performed
> for the purpose of correcting an apparent error. This seems like a
> reasonable desire to me, which I suppose could be accommodated by use
> of the type= attribute. (<add>,<del>, and<subst> all bear type= and
>>> My position has always been that there is no distinction more
>>> fundamental to textual scholarship than that between what is
>>> actually present in the text and what isn't
>> I'm all with you here...
>>> by employing two separate pairs of elements,<sic> and<corr> for
>>> editorial emendations,<add> and<del> for corrections made in
>>> the manuscript itself.
>> ...but isn't each<del> a<sic> and each<add> a<corr> if we look
>> at the effect on the text (rather than at the "synthetic" semantics
>> of TEI)?
>> On the other hand: What would be the difference between<choice>
>> and<subst> anyway? Is<choice> just the more generic element with
>> no other semantics?
>> In the text of the Guidelines we don't distinguish between<subst>
>> and<choice>. Wouldn't it be reasonable to "move" the distinction
>> between "in the source" and "in the edition" from the add/del and
>> sic/corr pairs to the use of choice vs. subst? Wouldn't it
>> "unburden" the former?
>> (I already can hear Lou's comment on "breaking documents" here.)