Dear All,
With the concession that encoding should always be balanced against envisioned purposes or possible purposes, I fully agree with Daniel’s remarks.  So if one envisions the possibility that the encoding will be used for a diplomatic edition, by all means use the space with binding-hole type.  Certainly spaces in mss. or inscriptions that normally have continuous text would desire a space element where an unusual interword space is found.
Thanks for the list of space element type values
Yours,
Peter

******************************
Peter M. Scharf, President
The Sanskrit Library
******************************

On 9 Oct 2019, at 1:44 PM, Dániel Balogh <danbalogh@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello again,
I agree with Peter Scharf that details of binding holes belong in the MS description. I do, however, think that encoding the actual position of binding holes vis-à-vis the text may be relevant for diplomatic editions; for instance they are occasionally the reason behind unusual sandhi or eyeskip, and even when they are not, it could be argued that they ought to be represented for the sake of accuracy. Further, I do not share Patrick's concern with TEI definitions. I am of course aware that the original purpose for which the <space/> element was introduced was to represent spaces left blank for subsequent filling but ultimately not filled for some reason or another. However, the base definition in the guidelines is "a significant space in the text", which leaves us much more freedom to use the element for another purpose; and the definition in the element description page says space is to be "used wherever it is desired to record an unusual space in the source text, e.g. space left for a word to be filled in later, for later rubrication, etc." The initial part of this phrase is very permissive, and the "etc." at the end, in my view, explicitly invites additional uses for <space/>.
Finally, I should point out that those of us who use EpiDoc (and I guess this must be true for users of other TEI flavours as well) are already well used to co-opting certain TEI elements and attributes for purposes that were not intended by the authors of TEI. For instance, would any of you object to using <space/> to encode an interword space in an Indic epigraph or manuscript that normally uses scripto continua? TEI guidelines explicitly say <space/> "is not intended to be used to mark normal inter-word space or the like" - but don't we all agree that such spaces are not "normal inter-word space" and definitely qualify as "significant space"?

For your information, the DHARMA Encoding guide (currently an unfinished draft; it will be public when the first release version is finalised) at the moment uses the following values for @type in <space/>:
vacat - for the classical case of space left blank for later filling
defect - left blank because of a defect in the surface
binding-hole - as agreed here
descender - space skipped because of a low-hanging character in the line above
ascender - skipped because of a high-rising character in the line below (added for symmetry, but these will be very rare)
without type: all other significant spaces, e.g. spacing of words, stanzas or smaller verse components, or semantic units of the text.

The very best,
Daniel

On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 07:59, Peter Scharf <scharf@sanskritlibrary.org> wrote:
Dear all,
We did not use a space element to indicate space for a binding hole because of exactly the considerations that Patrick just pointed out.  We describe the binding in the binding element once for the whole ms.  There is no need to repeat it everywhere a binding hole separates some continuous text.
Yours,
Peter

******************************
Peter M. Scharf, President
The Sanskrit Library
******************************

On 9 Oct 2019, at 1:51 AM, Patrick McAllister <pma@rdorte.org> wrote:

Dear list members,

tei:space is syntactically not quite what you want there, I think.
While its short description is simply that it “indicates the location of
a significant space in the text”, if you look further in the Guidelines
(https://tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/PH.html#PHSP) you’ll
find that they say:

“The author or scribe may have left space for a word, or for an initial
capital, and for some reason the word or capital was never supplied and
the space left empty. The presence of significant space in the text
being transcribed may be indicated by the space element.”

To me this means that “tei:space” should be used for those spaces where
some text is missing.  That’s not the case for the binding holes and
their surrounding spaces.  They are like margins in bound volumes: they
were left empty because the (later?) binding would have made anything
written there hard to read.  That said, I’m also using tei:space with
@type="binding-hole" at the moment.

I like the idea of proposing a dedicated element that can be used for
this kind of thing.  What attributes do you currently use when you use
tei:space for binding holes? I suppose indicating the type of binding
could be useful, and perhaps some way of indicating the shape and
dimension of the hole and the space surrounding it.  Might be
interesting to search by types/peculiarities of binding holes.

All the best,

On Tue, Oct 08 2019, Dániel Balogh wrote:

Dear All,
binding-hole it is then. But I'm also curious to hear further details from
Camillo.
Best,
Daniel

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 07:36, Arlo Griffiths <arlo.griffiths@efeo.net> wrote:

The use of <space type="binding-hole"/> is also used in EIAD. The term
binding-hole is sufficiently broad to be applicable both to inscriptions
and to manuscripts. I recommend keeping it in lieu of simply <space
type="hole"/> because anyone may forget at any time that there is also
<space type="defect">, and so, in my view, <space type="hole"/> is too
ambiguous.

Best wishes,

Arlo

Le 7 oct. 2019 à 19:44, Dániel Balogh <danbalogh@gmail.com> a écrit :

Dear Peter and Andrew,
the current draft of the DHARMA encoding guide says <space type="hole">
which is also the way I handled copperplate binding holes in the Siddham
corpus. I prefer the simpler "hole" to the more cumbersome "binding-hole"
but if you, Andrew, have already used "binding-hole" a lot and would prefer
this more accurate term, please convince me to adopt it for use in DHARMA.
(Fyi, I our guide prescribes <space type="defect"> for all spaces left
blank due to physical defects in the surface, so "hole" is not in my
opinion ambiguous.)
Best,
Dan

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 19:14, Andrew Ollett <andrew.ollett@gmail.com>
wrote:

I use <space type="binding-hole"/>. I am not sure what the current
recommendation in major projects (e.g. DHARMA).

On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 12:12 PM Peter Mukunda Pasedach <
peter.pasedach@googlemail.com> wrote:

Dear all,

how do you represent string holes in TEI transcripts of palm-leaf
manuscripts?

Best,

Peter
_______________________________________________
Indic-texts mailing list
Indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts

_______________________________________________
Indic-texts mailing list
Indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts

_______________________________________________
Indic-texts mailing list
Indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts


_______________________________________________
Indic-texts mailing list
Indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts

_______________________________________________
Indic-texts mailing list
Indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts


--
Patrick McAllister
long-term email: pma@rdorte.org
_______________________________________________
Indic-texts mailing list
Indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts

_______________________________________________
Indic-texts mailing list
Indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org
http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts