[tei-council] Responses to Primary Sources #3 (up to the end of 11.3.3.1)

[Martin Holmes]

Next batch, hoping it's not too late:

------------------

11.3.1.6: All OK with me.

------------------

11.3.1.7:

------------------

The example introduced with:

"For example, when encountering the form ‘dedikararunt’ on an 
inscription, the editor may choose any of the following three 
possibilities..."

would benefit from a little more explanation. What language is it? 
What's wrong with it? If some context were provided, the markup choices 
would make more sense to the reader.

Ditto the following Italian example.

------------------

The sentence beginning:

"If the source text is completely illegible or missing..."

threw me for a minute; what it should say is "If PART OF the source text 
is completely illegible or missing".

------------------

11.3.2: Intro all OK with me.

------------------

11.3.2.1:

------------------

This sentence has a couple of infelicities:

"As might be expected, one hand may employ different renditions within 
the one writing style, for example medieval scribes often indicate a 
structural division by emboldening all the words within a line."

First, "the one" should just be "one". Second, there's a comma splice. 
Suggest using a period after "writing style".

------------------

This sentence also uses the rather jarring "the one" formulation:

"In the following example there is a change of ink within the one hand."

Suggest deletion of "the", or change to "the same".

------------------

11.3.2.2:

------------------

This sentence:

"The resp attribute, by contrast, indicate the person responsible for 
deciding to apply the element carrying it to this part of the text, and 
hence has a slightly different interpretation."

has two problems: first, "indicate" should clearly be "indicates". 
Second, I'm not really sure what "apply the element carrying it to this 
part of the text" means. Suggest replacing this with "the person 
responsible for deciding to apply the tag to which it applies...".

-----------------

In this sentence:

"However, there will be cases where it is desired to state 
responsibility..."

I suggest "desirable" rather than "desired".

----------------

11.3.3: Intro OK with me.

----------------

11.3.3.1:

----------------

This should end with a colon:

"As members of the class att.damaged, these elements bear the following 
attributes"

----------------

This is rather odd:

"att.damaged provides attributes describing the nature of any physical 
damage affecting a reading. 1.3.1 Attribute Classes"

The link at the end goes to the general introduction to attribute 
classes. It should go to a place where this particular attribute class 
is discussed (presumably the current location, although I'd prefer it if 
we could suppress links to the current location, as we've discussed on 
the list). The problem appears to be in att.damaged, which includes this:
   <listRef>
     <ptr target="#STECAT"/>
   </listRef>

The same issue appears with att.spanning below.

----------------

In this sentence:

"Note that in this example the spanTo element points to the next pb 
element rather than to an inserted anchor element, since the whole of 
the leaf (the text between the two pb elements has sustained damage."

a closing parenthesis should be inserted after "elements".

---------------

This sentence has no final punctuation. It should be either a period or 
a colon:

"In this (imaginary) text of Fitzgerald's translation from Omar Khayam, 
water damage has affected an area covering parts of several lines "

---------------

This sentence is very difficult to parse:

"Where, as here, several phenomena of illegibility and conjecture all 
result from the one cause, an area of damage to the text — rubbing at 
various points — which is not continuous in the text, affecting it at 
irregular points, the join element may be used to indicate which tagged 
features are part of the same physical phenomenon. "

Suggest rephrasing in multiple sentences, like this:

"Here, several phenomena of illegibility and conjecture all result from 
a single cause: an area of damage to the text caused by rubbing at 
various points. The damage is not continuous, and affects the text at 
irregular points. In cases such as this, the join element may be used to 
indicate which tagged features are part of the same physical phenomenon."

----------------

In this sentence, the second comma should not be there:

"Returning to the Eddic example above, an encoder less confident in the 
daga reading, may indicate this as follows: "

----------------

In this section, I can't figure out how "msm" relates to Finnur Jónsson:

[quote]
Alternatively, the transcriber may not feel able to read the last three 
letters of daga but may wish to supply them by conjecture. Note the use 
of the resp attribute to assign the conjecture to Finnur Jónsson:

um aldr d<supplied reason="rubbing" resp="#msm">aga</supplied> yndisniota
[/quote]

Surely it should be @resp="#fj"? (I think, reading on, that this is a 
copy-paste error from the following example, where #msm is a witness.)

-----------------

In this sentence:

"In the following imaginary example, there is a smoke-damaged part 
within which two stretches can be read with some difficulty, and third 
stretch which cannot be read at all: "

there needs to be an additional "a" before "third stretch".

-----------------

That's it for today.

Cheers,
Martin