Print

Print


Hi Tara,

at Henrik Ibsen's Writings we encode variants like this:

VARIATION IN WORDS/PHRASES:
<app type="external" subtype="word">
<rdg wit="C2 C21938-1 C21395">vinteren</rdg>
<rdg wit="C291 C2FU">Vinteren</rdg>
</app>

VARIATION IN INTERPUNCTION:
<app type="external" subtype="interpunction">
    <rdg wit="C2 C21395 C291 C2FU">Kristiania,</rdg>
    <rdg wit="C21938-1">Kristiania</rdg>
</app>

We had to allow a new attribute subtype because we already make use of the
type attribute to distinguish between internal variation (between
different exemplars of a printed edition), external variation (between
different text sources) and alteration (subtitutions in a handwritten
manuscript).

With this encoding we have been able to make different presentations of
the variation: including all variation, only variation at word/phrase
level or only variation in interpunction.

We have not recorded all variation in the textual material, for instance
whether there are final punctuation or not in entries in a cast list or in
a list of contents. Then we have simply not encoded the variation here,
but given general information together with the guidelines for the edition
of what kind of variation we have chosen to include.

If you are interested I can give you more information about our treatment
and encoding of variants off-list.

Hope this was helpful,
Stine Brenna Taugbol.

> Hi,
>
> On 4 Jan 2009, at 12:56, Peter Boot wrote:
>
>> The witDetail element is synonymous with <note type='witnessDetail'>
>> (see note in
>> http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-witDetail.html)
>> . 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.
>
> That is a good point, and it's helped me to clarify in my mind what it
> is I'm after.
>
> The fundamental dilemma I have is that, if I put the punctuation
> directly in the <rdg/> element, I have three options:
>
> - Ignore the punctuation variations between manuscripts.
>
> - Record punctuation variants as part of the word lemma, which might
> give an apparatus entry like this:
> 	minchev,:  CD minchev BE minchev; Q minchev. FG misht ev
> That could get very irritating to format, very quickly, since the
> apparatus itself relies on punctuation separation.
>
> - Record punctuation variants in a standalone fashion.  That would
> look even worse than the example above, and so this option can pretty
> much be discarded out of hand.
>
> So part of my question is, for those of you who have already done any
> sort of digital text edition: how did/do you handle punctuation
> variants in the apparatus, and in the TEI encoding?  I can see that a
> digital edition allows for a much more detailed presentation of small
> differences than would be practical in a book, but I haven't seen any
> examples of how these minute differences are, in practice, being
> handled.
>
> I'm trying to address this question by allowing as much flexibility as
> possible—ideally to avoid deciding for myself what level of detail to
> include, leaving it instead to a user of the edition.  What I am
> trying to accomplish, by putting the punctuation in a <witDetail/>, is
> to allow an editing program to parse my initial TEI file to put forth
> a set of readings, e.g.:
> <app xml:id="App481">
>         <rdg wit="#Jer #K">
>           <w>zastoucoy</w>
>         </rdg>
>         <rdg wit="#V #Y">
>           <w>astoucoyn</w>
>         </rdg>
>         <witDetail target="#App481" wit="#Jer" type="punctuation">,</
> witDetail>
>         <witDetail target="#App481" wit="#K" type="punctuation">:</
> witDetail>
>         <witDetail target="#App481" wit=" #V #Y"
> type="punctuation">,</witDetail>
>         <rdg wit="#X" type="omission"/>
>     </app>
>
> and ask the user (that is, the editor) to choose a lemma.  The editor
> could then choose from the available options, and the resulting lemma
> would include the appropriate punctuation in the main body of the
> reading:
>
> <app xml:id="App481">
>         <lem wit="#Jer #K">
>           <w>zastoucoy,</w>
>         </lem>
>         <rdg wit="#V #Y">
>           <w>astoucoyn</w>
>         </rdg>
>         <witDetail target="#App481" wit="#K" type="punctuation">:</
> witDetail>
>         <witDetail target="#App481" wit=" #V #Y"
> type="punctuation">,</witDetail>
>         <rdg wit="#X" type="omission"/>
>
> and the resulting edition could either include punctuation variants
> (as supplied by the witDetail notes) or not, if the editor / reader
> deemed that to be overly pedantic for his/her purposes.
>
> Does this make sense?  Would it be useful?  Are there other approaches
> out there that I would be better off using?
>
> -tara


-- 
Henrik Ibsens skrifter
www.ibsen.uio.no