Hi David,

I think this is a good approach. If you are using <text> element then what you are privileging in your markup are the intellectual structures you find in the text. Imagine a a parallel example: A heading of a division of a magazine article that is provided as a cut-in from the right margin into the middle of the second paragraph. It would be clear from context that this was a heading for the section or article and in coming to that interpretation I would mark it as a <head> immediately inside the <div> at the top. I might indicate through @rend or @rendition an informally or formally (respectively) description of where this is ('right-margin-cut-in-header' or the formal CSS to float it there). I think the same is true of a post-script. Moreover, I don't think indicating the place by an anchor is necessary or accurate if you are modelling your semantic understanding of the text. 

If, however, you do care precisely where this is, then I would be referencing a <zone> for the <surface> either in a <facsimile> (if you just care about the location either on an image of the surface or its place in a coordinate space you've created) or a <zone> in a  <surface> in a <sourceDoc> if you wish to reference a non-interpretative transcription from your interpretative one. Since I don't tend to want to do that I would either do the @rend/@rendition or <facsimile> methods personally.

Best wishes,



Dr James Cummings, [log in to unmask]

School of English Literature, Language, and Linguistics, Newcastle University

From: TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) public discussion list <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of David Denison <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 29 January 2018 12:55:58
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Daniel Webster breaks the TEI Guidelines
This is a belated response from a first-time contributor, with a question for the list. David Sewell cited a self-conscious PS at the very top of a letter and asked

> Would anyone argue for encoding it at the end of the document, with a modifier of some sort to indicate place?

Well, maybe. In our on-going edition of the Mary Hamilton Papers (http://www.projects.alc.manchester.ac.uk/image-to-text/), we think logical continuity of content is even more useful than absolute faithfulness to physical layout. Writers sometimes fill every last scrap of white space with continuations of the letter and PSs in various orientations, not to mention leaving space for an address panel which will be on the outside of the folded sheet. Our policy in the XML has been to indicate actual position but to move interruptions of this kind to their logical place, or to the end; a good example is the letter HAM/1/10/1/25.

In the case of the delightful Daniel Webster PS, I'd be tempted to leave it in situ because of its content and because it wouldn't interrupt the text of the letter there. Then it would just be a question of mark-up. (Paul Schaffner's hypothetical but entirely plausible mid-letter PS might be trickier.)

My question is how best to mark material that *is* moved. So far we've been placing an anchor at the original location tied to paired ref tags at the destination location. We're currently revising our mark-up to improve TEI conformance, so now would be a good time to find out whether anchor-ref is the right way to handle this. Advice welcome. Thanks.