Textual alterations - Revision history

Elenap: /* Textual alterations */

2009-03-13T10:55:44Z

‎Textual alterations

Elenap: /* Textual alterations */

2009-03-12T17:49:20Z

‎Textual alterations

Piotr Banski: recat

2009-01-29T11:44:21Z

recat

Piotr Banski: + temporary category ("?")

2009-01-29T11:07:13Z

+ temporary category ("?")

Desmond: /* Textual alterations */

2009-01-02T08:43:41Z

‎Textual alterations

Desmond: /* Textual alterations */

2009-01-02T03:23:42Z

‎Textual alterations

Desmond: /* Textual alterations */

2009-01-02T03:16:45Z

‎Textual alterations

Desmond: /* Textual alterations */

2009-01-02T03:15:33Z

‎Textual alterations

Desmond: /* Textual alterations */

2009-01-02T03:14:40Z

‎Textual alterations

Desmond: /* Textual alterations */

2009-01-02T00:21:40Z

‎Textual alterations

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 * gap for a planned insertion (which has been filled or not)
 * alternatives
-* fusion
+* fixation
 Here are Hilde Bøe's slides with examples from Henrik Ibsen's manuscripts: http://www.emunch.no/tei-mm-2008/index_ms.html

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 * functional mark (marked as used, printer marks, later scribe marks),
 * gap for a planned insertion (which has been filled or not)
 Here are Hilde Bøe's slides with examples from Henrik Ibsen's manuscripts: http://www.emunch.no/tei-mm-2008/index_ms.html

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:44, 29 January 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	[[~~category~~:?]]	+	[[Category:Genetic Editions]]
	todo: Add examples for all forms. Especially difficult ones		todo: Add examples for all forms. Especially difficult ones

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:07, 29 January 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	[[category:?]]
	todo: Add examples for all forms. Especially difficult ones		todo: Add examples for all forms. Especially difficult ones

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 * Restoration is the deletion of a crossing-out. This is a case of variation in the markup itself
 * Overwriting - another case of substitution, but with a different graphical detail
-* Transposition cannot be represented adequately via markup. Since entire blocks of text, or single words, can be transposed across the boundaries of tags, how can this be done without breaking the schema of the XML document? In theory anything, even markup itself, can be transposed e.g. movement of a line-break: word&lt;/l&gt;&lt;l&gt; into &lt;/l&gt;&lt;l&gt;word. A mechanism for representing transposition is needed, in addition to some way of recording its visual appearance. See D. Smith Textual Variation and Version Control in the TEI, Computers and the Humanities, 33.1-2 (1999) 103-112, who says a few things about transposition in Shakespeare.
+* Transposition cannot be represented adequately via markup. Since entire blocks of text, or single words, can be transposed across the boundaries of tags, how can this be done without breaking the schema of the XML document? In theory anything, even markup itself, can be transposed e.g. movement of a line-break: word&lt;/l&gt;&lt;l&gt; into &lt;/l&gt;&lt;l&gt;word. A mechanism for representing transposition is needed, in addition to some way of recording its visual appearance. See D. Smith Textual Variation and Version Control in the TEI, Computers and the Humanities, 33.1-2 (1999) 103-112, who argues that we need to go 'one level above' the markup to represent transposition or variation in markup.
-* Deletion in markup seems simple but is also problematic: how does one represent, for example, the deletion of a paragraph boundary? &lt;del&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/del&gt;??? or deletion of underlining on its own without also enclosing the underlined word in a &lt;del&gt; element??
+* Deletion in markup seems simple but is also problematic: how does one represent, for example, the deletion of a paragraph boundary? &lt;del&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/del&gt;??? or deletion of underlining on its own without also enclosing the underlined word in a &lt;del&gt; element?
 * immediate/instant correction is really a partial version which disturbs the flow: 'I think &lt;del&gt;the...&lt;/del&gt; a reason is ...' There is really one original version here that has no continuation in the sentence.
 In principle textual variation is ''outside'' the text, even if the text contains markup. Any other representation leads to serious shortcomings.

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 * transposition,
 * clarification,
-* substition (should allow for cases like stylisitic rewriting and total rewriting, looser way),
+* substitution (should allow for cases like stylisitic rewriting and total rewriting, looser way),
 * restoration,
 * overwriting,

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 Here are Hilde Bøe's slides with examples from Henrik Ibsen's manuscripts: http://www.emunch.no/tei-mm-2008/index_ms.html
-These categories appear to refer to the graphical form of the text. A distinction should be drawn, between the logical editing operations that change the flow of the text, which only include insertion, deletion, substitution and transposition, and their graphical form in manuscripts. For example:
+These categories appear to refer to the graphical form of the text. A distinction should be drawn, however, between the logical editing operations that change the flow of the text, which only include insertion, deletion, substitution and transposition, and their graphical form in manuscripts. For example:
 * Clarification is a purely graphical rewriting of the same text. It is really a kind of substitution
 * Transposition cannot be represented adequately via markup. Since entire blocks of text, or single words, can be transposed across the boundaries of tags, how can this be done without breaking the schema of the XML document? In theory anything, even markup itself, can be transposed e.g. movement of a line-break: word&lt;/l&gt;&lt;l&gt; into &lt;/l&gt;&lt;l&gt;word. A mechanism for representing transposition is needed, in addition to some way of recording its visual appearance. See D. Smith Textual Variation and Version Control in the TEI, Computers and the Humanities, 33.1-2 (1999) 103-112, who says a few things about transposition.
-* Deletion in markup seems simple but is also problematic: how does one represent for example the deletion of a paragraph boundary? &lt;del&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/del&gt;??? or deletion of underlining on its own without also enclosing the underlined word in a &lt;del&gt; element??
+* Deletion in markup seems simple but is also problematic: how does one represent, for example, the deletion of a paragraph boundary? &lt;del&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/del&gt;??? or deletion of underlining on its own without also enclosing the underlined word in a &lt;del&gt; element??
 * immediate/instant correction is really a partial version which disturbs the flow: 'I think &lt;del&gt;the...&lt;/del&gt; a reason is ...' There is really one original version here that has no continuation in the sentence.
 * In principle textual variation is ''outside'' the text, even if the text contains markup. Any other representation leads to serious shortcomings.

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 * Clarification is a purely graphical rewriting of the same text. It is really a kind of substitution
-* Transposition cannot be represented adequately via markup. Since blocks of text can also be transposed, or single words, across the boundaries of tags, how can this be done without breaking the schema of the XML document? In theory anything, even markup itself can be transposed e.g. movement of a line-break: word&lt;/l&gt;&lt;l&gt; into &lt;/l&gt;&lt;l&gt;word. A mechanism for representing transposition is needed, in addition to some way of recording its visual appearance. See D. Smith Textual Variation and Version Control in the TEI, Computers and the Humanities, 33.1-2 (1999) 103-112, who says a few things about transposition.
+* Transposition cannot be represented adequately via markup. Since entire blocks of text, or single words, can be transposed across the boundaries of tags, how can this be done without breaking the schema of the XML document? In theory anything, even markup itself can be transposed e.g. movement of a line-break: word&lt;/l&gt;&lt;l&gt; into &lt;/l&gt;&lt;l&gt;word. A mechanism for representing transposition is needed, in addition to some way of recording its visual appearance. See D. Smith Textual Variation and Version Control in the TEI, Computers and the Humanities, 33.1-2 (1999) 103-112, who says a few things about transposition.
 * Deletion in markup seems simple but is also problematic: how does one represent the deletion of a paragraph boundary? &lt;del&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/del&gt;??? or deletion of underlining on its own without also enclosing the underlined word in a &lt;del&gt; element??
 * immediate/instant correction is really a partial version which disturbs the flow: 'I think &lt;del&gt;the...&lt;/del&gt; a reason is ...' There is really one original version here that has no continuation in the sentence.
 * In principle textual variation is ''outside'' the text, even if the text contains markup. Any other representation leads to serious shortcomings.