Andrew Dunning

Provide punctus elevatus at U+2E4E

Given that there is now a proper punctus elevatus at U+2E4E, this should not be necessary.

I'm thinking of it as an appropriate way of dealing with something like the last line of British Museum 1756,0101.1126. (I've also lost track of where the debate went over whether we're allowed to use EpiDoc for manuscripts, but that's my own problem …)

Allow <trailer>

Interesting – thanks! I would be interested to know if <restore> simply isn't applicable to epigraphy, or if the tag itself is simply too weird; I have been tending to add another <subst> layer to work around its absence in the meantime (a rare occurrence).

Those are all intended to formalize characters already in MUFI, just in case it wasn't clear (I was involved with the proposal for the punctus elevatus, 2E4E).

I have tended to use EpiDoc as a sane version of TEI for premodern documents; having...

Allow <restore>