Print

Print


Peter,
I am not sure about this. What is usually meant is that an author 
strikes through a passage, but by realizing that it was wrongly done 
adds some dashes below the word to restore the previous state. As in the 
case of rend/rendition/style I tend to limit the use of <restore>  to 
phenomena I see in the source in front of me and wouldn't use it for the 
purpose of providing a special view on the document.  Your meaning of 
"editorial" here seems to suggest a particular output  produced by an 
e.g. XSLT. Accordingly I'd rather use a xml:id attribut for the relevant 
<del> element  and display it by XSLT whereas the other <del> elements 
are left out.
Best,
Thomas


Am 30.01.2019 um 09:58 schrieb Peter Boot:
>
> Hello list,
>
> In one of our editions, the bits of text that the author deleted, 
> marked as <del>, are not shown in the final reading text. Suppose 
> there is also a larger text fragment that was deleted, which, as an 
> exception, the editor wants to include in the reading text. How would 
> you feel about encoding this as:
>
> <restore hand="#editor"><del> …. deleted text …. </del></restore>
>
> The definition of <restore> says ‘restoration of text to an earlier 
> state by cancellation of an **editorial** or authorial marking or 
> instruction’. So to me this seems perhaps strange, but still entirely 
> legitimate.
>
> Any opinions? Handle this in a rend attribute perhaps?
>
> Peter
>
> Peter Boot ([log in to unmask] 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>)
>
> Senior researcher
>
> Huygens Institute for the History of the Netherlands (Royal 
> Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences)
>
> http://www.huygens.knaw.nl/boot/
>
> http://peterboot.nl/
>
> Tel.: +31 20 2246825
>

-- 
***************************************
Prof. Dr. Thomas Stäcker
Direktor der
Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Darmstadt
Magdalenenstr. 8
64289 Darmstadt
+49 (0)6151 16-76200
[log in to unmask]