Print

Print


Dear list,

I am working on material (fragmentary early Buddhist
manuscripts) that calls for an encoding close to the
physical level of the document, and have been using
as one of my guidelines the work of the Manuscripts
SIG on documents and genetic criticism:

   http://www.tei-c.org/SIG/Manuscripts/genetic.html
   http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/Council/Working/tcw19.html

This work seems to be about eight years old now. The
first page states that “[t]he Module has been
accepted in principle by the TEI Council in April
2010 and the module is now ready for testing.” I can
see that some of it (for instance the <line> element)
has indeed made it into the TEI Guidelines, while
other aspects (for instance the <document> element)
have not.

Is there some account somewhere of the criteria for
inclusion or otherwise of the SIG’s proposals, or
indeed any more recent work (design or application)
in this area?

One particular thing I am wondering about is how to
express the following situation. A text of two lines
is broken into two fragments A and B such that A
contains the beginnings of each line, B the end of
each line, and some part of the text in between (here
marked with + signs) is missing:

   A          B
   bla di + + bla blo
   da dim + + dum

It seems to me that the <damage> element does not
quite have the right meaning, since in the following

   <damage group="A">
     bla di
   </damage>
   <gap quantity="2"/>
   <damage group="B">
     bla blo
   </damage>
   <damage group="A">
     da dim
   </damage>
   <gap quantity="2"/>
   <damage group="B">
     dum
   </damage>

the bits enclosed by <damage> are damaged only in the
sense of being incomplete at the left or right edge.

All best,
Stefan Baums

-- 
Stefan Baums, Ph.D.
Institut für Indologie und Tibetologie
Ludwig‐Maximilians‐Universität München