Print

Print


Hi Antonio,

I would generally recommend the 2nd option, that is choice/orig/reg if it
is you as an editor who does the regularisation/modernisation of the
spelling.

Hovewer if you want to record variation between older and modern editions,
there's always app/rdg (and lem if you wanto to have some 'preferred'
reading)
eg

<l>Theres my line where some part was
<app>
<rdg wit="#S1">spelled like this in old days</rdg>
<rdg wit="#S2">spelled differently later</rdg>
</app>
</l>

Best,

Magdalena Turska


On 12 June 2014 13:41, ANTONIO ROJAS CASTRO <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Hi Martin,
>
> Both old and modernized spelling "versions" (or transcriptions) are based
> on one manuscript - which I call "base manuscript" because I used it to
> collate other manuscripts in order to get substantive variants.
>
> Many thanks
>
>
> 2014-06-12 14:34 GMT+02:00 Martin Holmes <[log in to unmask]>:
>
> Hi Antonio,
>>
>> Is your base text one of the two versions you mention, or is it a third
>> text?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> On 14-06-12 04:07 AM, ANTONIO ROJAS CASTRO wrote:
>>
>>> Dear TEI list members
>>>
>>> I am currently encoding a long poem in Spanish and I have come across
>>> some difficulties. I have been encoding both an old spelling version and
>>> a modern spelling version of my base manuscript in order to present them
>>> as parallel texts. In addition, after collating several scripts, my aim
>>> is to encode a critical apparatus attached to the modern spelling
>>> version.
>>>
>>> I have been reviewing the Guidelines but I failed to find what should be
>>> the "best" method:
>>>
>>>  1. I could treat these transcriptions as different texts and encode
>>>
>>>     them in different XML files - although I'm using the same script as
>>>     a base text?
>>>  2. I could use the <choice> element and combine the <orig> and <reg>
>>>
>>>     elements to encode both transcriptions?
>>>  3. I could link both transcriptions as parallel texts using the
>>>
>>>     <linkGrp> element as described here?
>>>     http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/SA.html#SACSAL
>>>
>>> I have seen that some projects follow the first methodology but I don't
>>> know how they connect both files so I remain suspicious (browser?); I
>>> would prefer not to follow the second one because I'm already using the
>>> element <choice> to encode abbreviations and expansions and I believe
>>> there would be a conflict with the apparatus. Finally the last method I
>>> think is meant to be used for encoding one text in different languages
>>> (original and translation) and also it entails I'll have to identify
>>> each <l> in order to link them, which I began to do and it is very
>>> tiring.
>>>
>>> This would be a native digital edition so I don't have to stick to any
>>> model apart from my base manuscript.
>>>
>>> Any advice? Any other method?
>>>
>>> Many thanks.
>>>
>>> All the best
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Antonio Rojas Castro
>>> http://upf.academia.edu/AntonioRojasCastro
>>> https://twitter.com/Rojas_Castro_A
>>> https://www.zotero.org/groups/humanidades_digitales
>>> 650 767 335
>>> <http://www.facebook.com/antoni.rojas>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Antonio Rojas Castro
> http://upf.academia.edu/AntonioRojasCastro
> https://twitter.com/Rojas_Castro_A
> https://www.zotero.org/groups/humanidades_digitales
> 650 767 335
> <http://www.facebook.com/antoni.rojas>
>