On 28/09/15 17:45, Hugh Cayless wrote:
1. The original reading
marked by an <gi>app</gi> element; each reading is given in a <gi>rdg</gi>element; if it is - desired to single out one reading as preferred, it may be tagged <gi>lem</gi>:
was chosen after prolonged agitation from TEI users who didn't believe in "lem" as distinct from "rdg". The proposed revision is
marked by an <gi>app</gi> element; the preferred (or base) reading is tagged with <gi>lem</gi>; + each reading is given in a <gi>rdg</gi>element:
This renegues on our earlier decision by implying that a lem is required. I think this revision should probably just be reverted. This is in the section on parallel segmentation. I do obviously agree that a <lem> isn’t *required*, but I think the current prose pushes it too much into the background. You *should* mark a reading as belonging to the base text, partly because otherwise there’s no basis other than order for choosing which one to display in your text, but mainly because you should not pretend that you don’t have a base text. You do unless every single word is part of an app entry. I would argue that it’s best practice to use <lem> for most editions and that therefore it should come first—though I’m happy to note that it’s optional.
The trouble is that this wording asserts your (perfectly defensible but controversial) opinion on a topic without leaving space for dissent. Some people (I am told) don't agree that the concept of "a base text" makes much sense. Why *should* (your stars) I choose to privilege one of my readings as the base for the others? Why shouldn't I opine that there's no base text? And I don't need to mark every word as part of an app entry in that case : the words that are not part of an app entry are common to all witnesses. But we shouldn't really be having this fight here: I am only arguing for retaining the status quo. If you want to say something like "if, as is often the case, one reading is regarded as the preferred or base reading, then it should be marked using <lem> rather than <rdg>" I'll shut up.
I need a reminder of how to do "svn up" :-( git pull origin master (though it sounds like you already figured it out)
Sorry for the drizzle of stupid questions... I vaguely remember that at one point you pointed us at a helpful "tei git for dummies" document, but now I can't find it again, and all the current TEI working documents TCW20 etc. remain tight lipped on the subject.