#605 clarifying <add> vs. <supplied> and <del> vs. <surplus>
Elena wrote on TEI-L, "the TEI tend elsewhere to clearly distinguish editors from scribes: for instance scribal addition are encoded by <add>, editorial's by <supplied>; analogously, scribal deletions are encoded with <del> and editorial's with <surplus>." (See http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?A2=TEI-L;256a9cd2.1310 .)
If this is true, I think we need to adjust the Guidelines in a number of ways:
-
Section 3.4.3 ( #COEDADD ) should mention not only
<supplied>but also<surplus>. I suggest putting this extra discussion in the final paragraph, where we discuss<unclear>and<gap>. -
The
<specList>of elements at the beginning of section 34.3 ( #COEDADD ) should include both<supplied>and<surplus>. -
The definitions of
<add>and<del>should not claim that these elements is used for additions by an annotator or corrector.
I think I agree this distinction needs to be formally and clearly made, and probably isn't really at the moment. But I don't agree about the wording of
<add>and<del>. It's all down to the perspective of the encoder.<surplus>says "I am marking these characters out",<del>says "Somebody has marked these characters out". So<add>and<del>might indeed be used for corrections by a previous annotator or corrector.But I do think it's worth looking at this section and the related ones and making sure the point Elena makes is properly explained. And explaining
<supplied>and<surplus>alongside<add>and<del>might indeed be sensible.Added language attempting to address this bug in r12713.