Dear Daniel, Thanks a lot for the input, I agree with your approach! As to the @type or @rend, well I confess when I decided to use the @type, I had just started working with TEI. I see what you mean when you say that the according to the ENRICH or EpiDoc schemas' definition of the @rend might make you think that it is better to use this instead of the @type, but on the other the @rend should probably be used to describe how something is rendered in the original source materially, but not in terms of the typology. In other words, an expunction might have a different function than an erasure, since in the first case you can still read the aksaras, while in the second the correction obliterates what is beneath. In other words, again what counts is how we look at manuscripts, then we go about deciding what to mark up (and in the end, it is all about being consistent, right?). Ideally, we should try and create our own TEI documentation for South Asian manuscripts and texts. If we'll ever do that, I too would probably go for the @rend, just because it seems that most of you preferred to choose this attribute instead of @type (but this is because you want to emphasize one aspect over the other), and I am a huge fan of standardization. I don't know if what I've written makes sense or not, but again it's more about manuscript description that TEI strictly. Best wishes, Camillo Dr Camillo A. Formigatti John Clay Sanskrit Librarian Bodleian Libraries The Weston Library Broad Street, Oxford OX1 3BG Email: camillo.formigatti@bodleian.ox.ac.uk Tel. (office): 01865 (2)77208 www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk GROW YOUR MIND in Oxford University's Gardens, Libraries and Museums www.mindgrowing.org -----Original Message----- From: indic-texts-bounces@lists.tei-c.org [mailto:indic-texts-bounces@lists.tei-c.org] On Behalf Of indic-texts-request@lists.tei-c.org Sent: 04 April 2018 11:00 To: indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org Subject: indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 5 Send indic-texts mailing list submissions to indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to indic-texts-request@lists.tei-c.org You can reach the person managing the list at indic-texts-owner@lists.tei-c.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of indic-texts digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: some problems with encoding parts of ak?aras in manuscript transcriptions (Balogh D?niel) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 11:06:27 +0200 From: Balogh D?niel To: indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org Subject: Re: [Indic-texts] some problems with encoding parts of ak?aras in manuscript transcriptions Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Hello all, and let me add my thanks to Andrew for starting a thread. I've read your opinions with interest and have little new to add, but here are my thoughts anyway. My approach is based on encoding texts in Romanised form (whether IAST or SLP doesn't matter). My basic feeling is that marking up every little feature may not be worth the trouble. I believe this is what Camillo has been suggesting and what Peter has shown in his example. So reflecting changes on the level of phonemes should be fine, and a change of one vowel to another can be marked up simply as <subst><del>o</del><add>?</add></subst>. The deletion and the addition could be qualified with attributes as in Andrew's original post. I believe the generic solution (recommended in EpiDoc) would serve well: <subst><del rend="corrected">o</del><add place="overstrike">?</add></subst> Exactly how this change is implemented graphically in the written specimen is, as Camillo says, something that can be left to the reader's knowledge of the writing system in question; or, in the rare cases where we as editors think it will not be obvious to anyone who cares, described in a comment for human readers only. The same would work for the deletion of vowel m?tr?s i.e. correction of another vowel to "a". Or, if the a is described as implicit for the sake of precision, I would still suggest using the @place attribute with that value, not @type. If it is desired that the encoded text can be rendered in an Indic script, we must keep in mind that this is mainly for the sake of modern readers who are more familiar with those scripts than Romanisation. In most cases, rendering in a Devanagari or Kannada or whatever font will not be a 100% accurate representation of the way complex ak?aras are constituted in the MS. So, in my mind, this is a display issue that needs to be dealt with in the XSLT that produces human-readable output from your markup. Wrapping the entire ak?ara in a <c> element may make the transformation a lot easier. This is similar to what Charles is doing with <subst> but, I believe, entirely canonical. Using <c> to wrap ak?aras may also be an idea to consider for Andrew's second problem, though of course it doesn't solve the problem of the floating r. All the best, Dan ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ indic-texts mailing list indic-texts@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts End of indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 5 *****************************************