#684 multiple lems in an app

[Hugh A. Cayless]

The note for http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-rdgGrp.html contains the following text:

Note that only one lem element may appear within a single apparatus entry, whether it appears outside a rdgGrp element or within it.

But there are a number of examples of app containing multiple lems in http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/TC.html#TCAPSU

I have no idea what it would mean to have multiple lemmas, so the note seems right to me, but unless I'm mistaken, either the examples have to be fixed, or the note has to go.

[Marjorie Burghart]

I understand how it can be confusing, but I don't think it's a bug at all. It's a tool useful when you want an extra-precise encoding that would group variants together. For instance, your lemma in ms A reads "year", in ms B you have a variant "years" (same word), and in ms B you have "month" and in ms C "nomth". You might encode that as
<app>
<lem wit="A">year</lem>
<rdg wit="B">years</rdg>
<rdg wit="C">month</rdg>
<rdg wit="D">nomth</rdg>
</app>

But it is frustrating, because it put on the same level A, B, C, while obviously B is much closer to A. Also, it does not make clear that C and D probably belong in the same branch of the tradition, since D is just a spelling mistale on the same word as C. So you might want to encode this like that:

<app>
<lem wit="A">year</lem>
<rdg wit="B">years</rdg>
<rdgGrp>
<lem wit="C">month</lem>
<rdg wit="D">nomth</rdg>
</rdgGrp>
</app>

Here, the <lem/> in the rdgGrp means that this is the preferred, right version of ths variant, but not that it should be in the main text of the edition.

If anything, it seems to me we would need a <lemGrp/> element, so we could have a clearer encoding for people who use <lem/> elements in their <app/> (for some reason, many TEI people seem to think that it's smarter NOT to use <lem/> and only put <rdg/> in your text. As an editor, I don't relate to that).

You are right, though, that the note is inconsistent with the schema. I would still argue that the possibility of marking a preferred reading in each rdgGrp is potentially useful.

[James Cummings]

At Raleigh F2F: Change note to reflect that you can have 1 lem in each rdgGrp. Assign to HC.