Thank you Gerrit and Davide,

the solution in the Guidelines, the one linked by Gerrit, definitely 
look like the most appropriate semantically. But I think I'll follow 
your advice and go for something like

> <subst hand="#unknownhand" cause="correction">
>     <del rend="nostrikeout">reusis</del>
>     <add  place="margin" type="correction">
>         zeusis
>     </add>
> </subst> 

because this would make the encoding of such cases more consistent with 
simpler cases like

>> <subst hand="#unknownhand" cause="correction">
>>     <del rend="strikeout">reusis</del>
>>     <add  place="above" type="correction">
>>         zeusis
>>     </add>
>> </subst> 

...and the processing software much simpler.

Two smaller notes: possibly @cause="correction" is redundant, as all 
<subst>'s in the text are corrections.

Also, not all renderings of deletions are strikeouts (rasurae are also 
very common), so maybe, instead of <del rend="nostrikeout">, I could use 
<del rend="nomark">, or even <del rend="metamark">?

In fact, an asterisk or another metamark are written above the original 
word (in fact, both above the original word and above the word in 
margin). And that metamark has the function of "deleting" (abolishing, 
so to speak) the original word.


Il 04/09/2018 01:15, Gerrit Brüning ha scritto:
> Dear Paolo,
> The Guidelines make mention of substitutions without visible deletions here:
> However, if it is true that the first reading is not ultimately deleted, it
> is also true that the second reading is not ultimately added (although it is
> visible, unlike the deletion).
> So if you use add, it is justifiable (if not preferable) to use a more
> symmetric encoding than that proposed in the Guidelines, i.e., one with
> subst, add and del with an appropriate attribute.
> Best,
> Gerrit
> ---
> Dr. Gerrit Brüning
> Freies Deutsches Hochstift | Historisch-kritische Edition von Goethes Faust
> |
> Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main | Institut für deutsche Literatur und
> ihre Didaktik | IG-Hochhaus 1.155
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) public discussion list [mailto:TEI-
>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paolo Monella
>> Sent: Saturday, September 1, 2018 4:11 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: scribal correction detail : any changes in the meanwhile?
>> Dear all,
>> I am encoding Latin XI century manuscripts. I have situations in which a
> second
>> hand corrects the text (possibly in the margin of the text) without
> deleting the
>> original word. Example:
>> reusis<add hand="#unknownhand" place="margin" type="correction"
>> subtype="nodeletion">zeusis</add>
>> I'd like to mark up that the two words are alternative to each other -- in
> other
>> words, I'd like to mark that this is a substitution (<subst>).
>> But there is no deletion (<del>). This has been discussed in another TEI-L
>> thread in 2014:
>> (I found that thread through Paragraph "Transformation of letters without
>> deletion" in
>> https://wiki.tei-
>> hout_deletion)
>> The 2014 TEI-L discussion seemed to suggest something like:
>> <subst>
>>       <del type="nodeletion">reusis</del>
>>       <add hand="#unknownhand" place="margin" type="correction">
>>           zeusis
>>       </add>
>> </subst>
>> Has this issue been discussed within the TEI in the meanwhile? Or would
> you
>> still suggest to use @type on <del>?
>> One specific issue: I'd rather use @rend than @type with <del>, since in
> oter,
>> simpler cases, I did:
>> <subst hand="#unknownhand">
>>       <del hand="#unknownhand" rend="strikethrough">
>>           iudeorum
>>       </del>
>>       <add hand="#unknownhand" place="above" type="correction">
>>           indorum
>>       </add>
>>     </subst>
>> Thank you,
>> Paolo