Fwd: Re: Workshop on Transcription of Medieval MSS at Berkeley April 26 (fwd)

[John Unsworth]

Two questions that the Council should perhaps consider, next time it meets, 
in Chicago.  If an answer exists and has been offered, that's fine--but 
even if so, the question suggests a need for tinkering with documentation 
in P5.

John
==========
 From Charles Faulhaber:

>In the teiheader, it seems to me that there needs to be a "repository
>statement," a place where one can record explicitly the name and location
>of the repository that owns the manuscript being transcribed. We've used
><bibl> as a stopgap, but it really isn't a bibliographical entry.
>
>Any suggestions?
>
>I'm still struggling with the correct coding of words so that they can be
>extracted correctly for the purposes of concordances, word lists, and the
>like. Thus a word can be broken across two lines, but there needs to be
>some way to bring the two parts back together. It can have all sorts of
>abbreviations and addition-deletion combinations; but you still have to be
>able to extract the word with the addition but minus the deletion.

and later:

>I've seen no solutions on either the repository or the word problems.
>David Seaman suggested using <orig> as a workaround, and it does work, but
>in fact that actually flips the relationship, since what one is making is
>_not_ the original reading but the cleaned up editorial reading. In some
>sense it's the same relationship as between <sic> and <cor>.
>
>I think that TEI needs a <w> with a lot fewer constraints on what can go
>inside.