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.

Am 30.01.2019 um 09:58 schrieb Peter Boot:
[log in to unmask]">

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 Boot ([log in to unmask])

Senior researcher

Huygens Institute for the History of the Netherlands (Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences)

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]