Extracted from official github repo https://github.com/lombardpress/lombardpress-schema on 2020-01-23
layout: page title: “Lombard Press Schema 1.0.0 - Critical Transcription Guidelines” date: 2016-07-15 categories: schema —
Editors:
Document Status: Draft
The goal of the LombardPress Critical Transcription specification is to offer a set of guidelines for the markup of medieval scholastic commentaries and texts that conform, as much as possible, to existing standards. Therefore, these guidelines adopt the rules and conventions of the TEI guidelines and, within these constraints, work to proscribe a single encoding practice where TEI offers multiple possibilities.
The teiHeader defines metadata for the document about the file, including data on the author and title of the text as well as information about the edition.
teiHeader MUST contain fileDesc.teiHeader MUST contain encodingDesc.teiHeader MUST contain revisionDesc.<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0">
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<!-- Content of `fileDesc` -->
</fileDesc>
<encodingDesc>
<!-- Content of `encodingDesc` -->
</encodingDesc>
<revisionDesc status="draft">
<!-- Content of `revisionDesc` -->
</revisionDesc>
</teiHeader>
The fileDesc contains the full bibliographic description of an electronic file.
fileDesc MUST contain titleStmt.fileDesc MUST contain editionStmt.fileDesc MUST contain publicationStmt.The titleStmt determines the bibliographical information of the encoded file.
titleStmt MUST have a title.titleStmt MUST have an author.titleStmt SHOULD have a editor.titleStmt MAY have a respStmt.<titleStmt>
<title>Dicta super librum De anima</title>
<author>Simon Magister</author>
<editor>Michael Stenskjær Christensen</editor>
<respStmt>
<name xml:id="comments-JJ">John Johnson</name>
<resp>Editorial suggestions</resp>
</respStmt>
</titleStmt>
editionStmt indicates the edition of the document within the context of its source history.
editionStmt MUST contain an edition element.edition@n MUST be n=X.X.X-dev; usually, when starting a new document it should be listed as n=0.0.0-dev.edition MUST contain a date element.date element, that is the child of edition, MUST include a @when attribute, whose machine-formatted value corresponds to the date in the text node.edition SHOULD NOT contain any other children besides the date.<editionStmt>
<edition n="0.0.0-dev">
<date when="2016-06-18">June 18, 2016</date>
</edition>
</editionStmt>
publicationStmt indicates the authority supporting this edition (usually a sponsoring or funding research group). It should also list the license and availability of the text.
publicationStmt MUST have EITHER authority and availability elements as children OR a general p element.
authority and availability to identify the entity that makes the creation of the current document possible. See examples below.p MAY contain a ref to provide an external link to the authority-like entity.authority MAY contain a ref to provide an external link to the authority entity.availability SHOULD contain @status.availability SHOULD contain a p describing the license under which the edition is published.<publicationStmt>
<authority>Scholastic Commentaries and Text Archive Project</authority>
<availability status="free">
<p>Published under a <ref target="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License</ref></p>
</availability>
</publicationStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<authority>
<ref target="http://representationandreality.gu.se">
Representation and Reality: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on the Aristotelian Tradition
</ref>
</authority>
<availability status="free">
<p>Published under a <ref target="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License</ref></p>
</availability>
</publicationStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<authority>
<ref target="http://petrushispanusproject.po">Petrus Hispanus Project</ref></authority>
<availability status="free">
<p>Published under a <ref target="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License</ref></p>
</availability>
</publicationStmt>
sourceDesc should list the witnesses and sources used to construct the edition.
sourceDesc MUST contain listWit, listBibl or both.listWit MUST contain at least one wit.listBibl MUST contain at least one bibl.witness MUST have a @xml:id.witness SHOULD have a @n giving a short id of the witness.
@n SHOULD correspond to the short id for the manuscript or codex in the SCTA database. If the value is not known, leave it out. It will be added later during processing.handDesc, follow TEI guidelines.<listWit>
<witness xml:id="P" n="bnf15705">Paris, Lat 15705</witness>
</listWit>
<listBibl>
<bibl xml:id="Q" n="quaracchi1924">Quaracchi 1924 Edition</bibl>
</listBibl>
<listWit>
<witness xml:id="P" n="bnf15705">Paris, Lat 15705
<msDesc>
<physDesc>
<handDesc hands="2">
<handNote sameAs='#P'>This is the main hand of the text. German hand of the XIIIc with an inclination toward particularly complex majuscules.</handNote>
<handNote xml:id="#P1">Flemish hand of the XVc written in mauve ink. Used for minor corrections.</handNote>
</handDesc>
</physDesc>
</msDesc>
</witness>witness>
<witness xml:id="Pb" n="bda446">Paris, Bibliotheque de l'Arsenal, ms. lat. 446</witness>
<witness xml:id="Z" n="zbsSII72">Solothurn, Zentralbibliothek, Cod. S II 72</witness>
</listWit>
encodingDesc provides details about the encoding methods used in the text and the schema followed.
encodingDesc MUST be stated.encodingDesc SHOULD contain a variantEncoding element as a direct child.variantEncoding MUST contain @method which confirms that the method of variant encoding is parallel-segmentation.encodingDesc MUST contain a schemaRef element as a direct child.schemaRef MUST contain a @url that points to the URL of the LBP schema.schemaRef MUST contain an @n pointing to the version number of the LBP schema.encodingDesc MAY take an editorialDecl as a direct child.editorialDecl SHOULD contain a p element with a prose description of the guidelines followed in the preparation of this edition.<encodingDesc>
<variantEncoding method="parallel-segmentation"
location="internal"/>
<schemaRef
n="lbp-critical-1.0.0"
url="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/lombardpress/lombardpress-schema/master/src/1.0/critical.rng">
</schemaRef>
<editorialDecl>
<p>Encoding of this text has followed the recommendations of the LombardPress 1.0.0 guidelines for a critical edition</p>
</editorialDecl>
</encodingDesc>
The revisionDesc contains a description of the current and previous versions of the current edition.
The individual editor would usually not be responsible for maintaining the revisionDesc, as it should (ideally) be generated as part of the publication workflow.
revisionDesc MUST be stated.revisionDesc MUST contain @status.revisionDesc MUST contain listChange.listChange MUST contain at least one change.change MUST contain @when.change MUST contain @status. Possible values of the attribute are:
change MUST contain @n.change MUST contain either @corresp pointing to a description of the change in another file or a p describing the change.<revisionDesc status="draft">
<listChange>
<change when="2015-11-11" status="draft" n="0.0.0">
<p>Created file for the first time.</p>
</change>
</listChange>
</revisionDesc>
<revisionDesc status="draft">
<listChange>
<change when="2015-12-24" status="draft" n="0.1.0" corresp="versionlog.xml#v0.1.0" />
<change when="2015-11-11" status="draft" n="0.0.0">
<p>Created file for the first time</p>
</change>
</listChange>
</revisionDesc>
text is the main wrapper of the edition and sibling to the teiHeader.
text SHOULD take a @type attribute the value of which is “critical”.
text@type are:text SHOULD take an @xml:lang attribute indicating the dominant language of the edition, usually la for “latin”.front is used to make prefatory declarations about the text. For now that only includes the starting location of the text in the witnesses.
front MUST take a div with the xml:id="starts-on".
pb, cb, and lb elements indicating the page, column, and lb on which the text begins in the different witnesses. For the encoding of pb and cb
see the relevant section below.
<front>
<div xml:id="starts-on">
<pb ed="#V" n="5-r"/><cb ed="#V" n="b"/><lb ed="#V" n="15"/> <!-- V5rb -->
<pb ed="#S" n="2-r"/><cb ed="#S" n="a"/><lb ed="#S" n="5"/> <!-- S2ra -->
<pb ed="#R" n="1-r"/><cb ed="#R" n="a"/><lb ed="#R" n="1"/> <!-- R1ra -->
<pb ed="#SV" n="187-r"/><cb ed="#SV" n="a"/><lb ed="#V" n="49"/> <!-- SV187ra -->
</div>
</front>
body is the primary wrapper of the edited text.
body MUST immediately follow front.body MUST take a div as an immediate child.div is the fundamental section unit of an edition.
div in each edition as a direct child of body.div MAY only contain head and p as children.div MAY NOT contain any text nodes as direct children.head is the wrapper heading declaration for a div.
head MUST be an immediate child of a div.head MUST precede p elements in parent div.head MAY take an @type attribute.
@type values include:p (along with head) is the wrapper of all text nodes within the body element.
head element, MUST be descendants of a p element.p MUST be an immediate child of a div.In some situations a note in the critical apparatus is not necessary for indicating a critical evaluation by the editor. The following inline elements will usually have a semantically relevant rendering in the text.
In most cases correlated notes in the critical apparatus are also available. In only the most simple situations will this be sufficient for avoiding ambiguities. As soon as the text is not uniformly transmitted or the change is not made by the current editor, one should resort to critical notes using the critical apparatus guidelines outlined below.
supplied signifies text supplied by the editor because it is believed to be missing from the text, and it can be argued that it must have been part of the original text as intended by the author.
For the use of this in a critical note, see conjecture-supplied
supplied MUST contain the supplied text, and nothing but that.Utrum fides semper <supplied>sit</supplied> acquisita
In a processed text, this could result in the following text:
Utrum fides semper <sit> acquisita
surplus marks a text present in the source which the editor believes to be superfluous or redundant. According to the editor, the word(s) marked with surplus is therefore not to be considered part of the established text.
For the use of this in a critical note, see conjecture-removed.
surplus MUST contain the removed text, and nothing but that.Ergo non sequitur quod <surplus>quia</surplus> in probationem dicitur.
In a processed text, this could result in the following text:
Ergo non sequitur quod [quia] in probationem dicitur.
sic is used to indicate that, according to the best judgement of the editor, the demarcated text is corrupt, and the editor does not know how to solve the problem satisfyingly. Notice that this does not mean that there is a passage that the editor is not able to read, nor that a gap is left in the text, nor a physical damage is in the manuscript, but that the text as transmitted is incomprehensible.
sic MUST contain the text considered to be corrupt.subsidiis magnis <sic>epicuri</sic> constabilitas
In a processed text, this could result in the following text:
subsidiis magnis †epicuri† constabilitas
Below are the basic reading and lemma types in three main categories: variation, correction, and conjecture. Before detailing those types, the general rules of any apparatus entry are described here.
The general rules of any app element are:
app MUST contain lem element.app MUST contain at least one rdg element.app MAY contain a witDetail element.app MAY contain a note element.lem is empty, it MUST contain the @n element.lem MAY have @wit or @source.lem MAY take an another app element as a descendantlem SHOULD have @wit or @source when its parent app is contained within another app element.rdg MUST have @wit or @source.rdg MAY NOT take an another app element as a descendantWhen one or more witnesses contain readings that are not adopted in the critical text, the lem element MUST be left empty. Such an encoding would signify that some readings are present in a part of the tradition, but not included in the established text. When the lem is left empty, it is more difficult for the processor to anchor the entry in the text, so a label is needed. @n gives the processor a label for this purpose. Usually the word preceding the apparatus would be used for that. An example of this encoding would look like:
Praeterea, sicut oculus
<app>
<lem n="oculus"/>
<rdg wit="#B">nicticoracis</rdg>
</app>
ad lumen solis
This would make it easy to create the following apparatus entry:
nicticoracis post oculus B
The basic structure of the rdg typology can be described as follows
A variation is meant as any reading that varies from the indicated lemma. At present, we have identified five main variation types listed below.
A variation-substance is generally the most common type of variant, in which an editor simply wants to show that the witness has a different word or phrase than what is included in the critical text.
This kind of variant is most commonly seen in an apparatus as something like:
10 fides] spes A
rdg MAY have @type=variation-substance.
@type is only a “MAY” because this @type is so common and can be inferred by a processor from the following encoding pattern. Thus it is not necessary for an editor to state it on every reading.rdg text node MUST be present.<app>
<lem wit="#B #C #D">fides</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-substance">spes</rdg>
</app>
On a negative apparatus:
10 fides] spes A
On a positive apparatus:
10 fides] BCD spes A
The variation-orthography class is meant to identify a class of variant instances where there is no actual variation in the substance of the word or phrase in question but simply an orthographic difference.
rdg MUST have @type=variation-orthography.
@type is “MUST” because without the @type value, the encoding pattern is indistinguishable from the @type="variation-substance" encoding pattern.rdg text node MUST be present.<app>
<lem>sicut</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-orthography">sicud</rdg>
</app>
est
10 sicut] sicud A
variation-inversion is meant to indicate a variant reading where two or more words have been inverted relative to the critical text.
lem MUST not be empty.rdg MUST have @type=variation-inversion.rdg text node MUST be present.rdg MAY have two seg elements which indicate which elements have been inverted.In this simple example the rdg only contains two words.
fides non
<app>
<lem>bona fides</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-inversion">fides bona</rdg>
</app>
10 bona fides] fides bona A
In this example the rdg contains more than two words, and it is therefore necessary to indicate which words have been moved around with the seg element.
Ad demonstrationem tria requirantur: subiectum, passio, et
principium per quod ostenditur passio de subiecto. Ubi est
<app>
<lem>ista tria invenire</lem>
<rdg wit="#B">ista tria invenire</rdg>
<rdg wit="#O" type="variation-inversion">
<seg>invenire</seg>
<seg>ista tria</seg>
</rdg>
</app>
, ibi contingit ponere scientiam.
10 ista tria invenire ] invenire et ista tria inv O
The variation-present type should be used to indicate that a word or phrase is present in a witness but has not been included in the critical text. It is important that this be distinguished from the type correction-addition which is meant to indicate that a word or phrase has been actively added as a conscious correction to the witness text.
lem MUST be an empty node.
lem is empty it should have an @n="suggested-lemma-value" attribute, the value of which should be the word to appear in the critical text that immediately proceeds the app.rdg MUST have @type=variation-present.rdg MAY include @cause with the following available enumerated values:
fides
<app>
<lem n="fides"/>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-present">spes</rdg>
</app>
10 fides] spes in textu A
10 spes post fides hab./scr./inest A
Another example of the present type where the present word is caused by an (erroneous) repetition.
spes
<app>
<lem n="spes"/>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-present" cause="repetition">spes</rdg>
</app>
10 spes iter. A
A word or phrase is absent from a witness but present in the transmitted text. This is most often rendered as a simple “omission”.
10 fides] om. A
rdg MUST NOT have any descendant text nodes.rdg MAY have a child space element.
space may be used when attempting to indicate a space left by the scribe intended to be filled in later.rdg SHOULD include @type=variation-absent.
lem with a text value and a present but empty rdg element is a unique pattern that corresponds to the variation-absent type.rdg MAY include @cause with the following available enumerated values:
homeoteleutonhomeoarchon<app>
<lem>fides</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-absent"/>
</app>
In a positive apparatus this could be presented like this:
10 fides] B ; om. A
In a negative apparatus it would be like this:
10 fides] om. A
The following is an example of a conjecture where a word is added to the edition but missing in the transmitted text. For more on conjectures see below.
<app>
<lem type="conjecture-supplied"><supplied>fides</supplied></lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-absent"/>
</app>
est
fides
<app>
<lem>non semper sic, sed non</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-absent" cause="homeoteleuton"/>
</app>
10 non semper sic, sed non] om. A (hom.)
<app>
<lem>fides</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-absent"><space extent="5" unit="characters" /></rdg>
</app>
10 fides] spat. vac. (5 litt.) A
The variation-choice type can be used when a single witness (however the concept of witness is defined) contains two or more parallel readings, and it is not clear which reading is preferred. The distinction between this case and a correction can be difficult to discern, and one editor might feel convinced that the text contains a correction, while another might see it as two readings of potentially equivalent weight or value.
The seg elements are used to distinguish the different readings. If the editor wishes to indicate the chronological order of the readings, she may do so by adding the @n attribute as described below.
rdg MUST contain a choice element.choice MUST contain two or more seg elements.seg elements MAY use @n to indicate their relative order of the readings, when they are on the same baseline.seg element MAY contain an add element to indicate whether and where the reading was added, when it is not on the baseline of the text.seg or add MAY use @hand to indicate an alternative scribe.A simple example could look like this:
<app>
<lem>vel</lem>
<rdg wit="#G" type="variation-choice">
<choice>
<seg>et</seg>
<seg><add place="above-live">vel</add></seg>
</choice>
</rdg>
</app>
The representation in the apparatus would depend on the processor. But one suggestion is:
vel ] et et vel (s.l.) B
In this more complex example, M and V have the correct reading “instare”. S originally had “dicere” and then corrected it to “instare”. T includes both “dicere” and “instare” as options, but isn’t sure which one is correct and simply writes “dicere vel instare”.
<app>
<lem wit="#M #V">instare</lem>
<rdg wit="#S" type="correction-substitution">
<subst>
<del>dicere</del>
<add>instare</add>
</subst>
</rdg>
<rdg wit="#T" type="variation-choice">
<choice>
<seg>dicere</seg>
<seg>instare</seg>
</choice>
</rdg>
</app>
Since this is the critical encoding, and the editor interprets the “vel” in “dicere vel instare” of T to mean that the scribe believes one of the two to be the correct reading, this is encoded as a choice between the two. If the editor also produces a diplomatic edition of the witness G, it should reveal the more low level reading of “dicere vel instare”.
An apparatus representation of this could look like this:
instare ] instare MV ; instare corr. ex. dicere S ; dicere et instare T
A correction is meant as any reading where it is assumed that the witness corrects a perceived error in the transmitted text.
This is not used to represent corrections made by the edition. These kinds of corrections are reserved for the conjecture class below.
This indicates that a scribe (either the original or a later scribe) has realized that a word or phrase is missing in his text and subsequently added it. This should be clearly distinguished from variation-present above where the editor only means to indicate that a word is present in a witness, but has not been added through a conscious correction.
lem MAY be empty.
correction-addition in the critical text, but still indicate that the correction has been made in a witness. This is an instance where the correction-addition is also taking on the form parallel to that of a variation-present. In such a case the additional varation-present type can be inferred from the empty lemma.rdg SHOULD have @type="correction-addition".rdg MUST contain an add element.rdg MUST NOT contain any content outside of the add element.add MUST have a @place attribute.add MAY have a @hand attribute.<app>
<lem>fides</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="correction-addition">
<add place="margin-left">fides</add>
</rdg>
</app>
10 fides] add. in mg. A
In this example, a scribe wrote “in nomine Patri et Spiritus Sancti”, but a later hand (#L1) realized the mistake and added the missing phrase “Filii et” above the line.
in nomine Patri et
<app>
<lem>Filii et</lem>
<rdg wit="#L" type="correction-addition">
<add place="above-line" hand="#L1">Filii et</add>
</rdg>
</app>
Spiritus Sancti.
Filii et] add. s.l. L1
Filii et] add. s.l. alia manu L
Filli et] om. L (corr. *L1)*
This indicates that a scribe (either the original or a later scribe) has realized that a word or phrase is erroneously present in the text and subsequently deleted it.
lem MAY be empty.
lem will be empty, since it is normal to note a deletion of word that does not appear in the critical text. However, an editor might want to include a word in the critical text that has been deleted in one or more witnesses. In this case, the lem MUST NOT be empty.rdg SHOULD have @type="correction-deletion".rdg MUST contain a del element.rdg MUST NOT contain any content outside of the del element.del MAY have a @place attribute.
in-line. A deletion of something not in-line should generally be treated as a correction-cancellation. See correction-cancellation below.del SHOULD have a @rend attribute.del MAY have a @hand attribute.fides
<app>
<lem n="fides"/>
<rdg wit="#A" type="correction-deletion">
<del>non</del>
</rdg>
</app>
est
10 non post fides del. A
10 fides] non scr. sed del. A
sicut
<app>
<lem>dicit</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="correction-deletion">
<del>dicit</del>
</rdg>
</app>
Aristoteles
10 sicut] dicit scr. sed del. S
10 dicit post sicut del. S
This indicates that a scribe (either the original or a later scribe) wants to correct one word or phrase with another.
lem MAY be empty.
rdg SHOULD have @type="correction-substitution".rdg MUST contain a subst element as a direct child.subst MUST contain a del and a add element.subst MUST NOT contain any nodes other than the del and add elements.add MAY have a @place.del MAY have a @rend.@hand attribute MAY be placed on either the subst element or on the add and del elements.A possible argument against rule 6 is that an editor might desire to produce the following rendering for a correction to a particular word.
insidia N (s add. N1)
However, we find this rendering ambiguous and therefore somewhat problematic.
Does this mean N1 has added the letter “s” after “insidia” or to the word itself?
While in the case of “s”, it is probably obvious to an editor that “s” is not a word by itself and therefore the editor probably meant that “s” was added to “insidia”.
However, what if the added letter were “a”? Then it would be much less clear.
Likewise, scholastic texts use a lot of variables, so it is possible that a scribe could have been adding “b” or “c” as a separate word or character, and did not mean to add a new letter to the preceding word.
So for example, the following would be very ambiguous in a sequence where variables a, b, c, d, and e were in use:
insidia] N (e add. N2)
Does this mean that the correction was to “insidiae” or “insidia e”?
Thus we think it would be best to handle this with a correction-substitution, which could render to:
insidias] corr. ex insidia alia manu N
It is true that with something like
<app>
<lem>insidias</lem>
<rdg wit="#N" type="correction-substitution">
<subst>
<del>insidia</del>
<add>insidias</add>
<subst>
</rdg>
</app>
We certainly sacrifice some specificity about how the correction was made (namely, by simply adding an “s” rather than crossing out the whole word and replacing it with the new word). However, we gain considerable clarity about the meaning of the correction.
In sum: The problem we face with the language of “addition, correction, substitution” etc. is that it becomes tempting to record two distinct types of phenomena: 1) the ultimate meaning of the correction and 2) the material way in which that correction was made.
In the example above the addition of “s” to “insidias” is, in meaning, really a correction-substitution, even though the way that the correction was materially made makes it look like a simple correction-addition.
By adding “s” the scribe, did not meant to simply add an “s”, but rather meant to replace the word “insidia” with “insidias”.
In its rendering, it looks equivalent to the addition of a missing word or letter, but the effect or meaning of the correction is to substitute one word with another.
In our view, complex details about how a correction was precisely made is best left recorded in a witDetail (see below) and in an accompanying diplomatic transcriptions of the witness.
<app>
<lem>fidem</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="correction-substitution">
<subst>
<del>spem</del>
<add>fidem</add>
</subst>
</rdg>
</app>
10 fidem] corr. ex spem A
<app>
<lem>fides</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="correction-substitution">
<subst>
<del>fidem</del>
<add hand="#A1" place="margin-right">fides</add>
</subst>
</rdg>
</app>
est
10 fides] fidem A (ante corr. A1)
10 fides] corr. ex fidem in mg. A1
10 fides] corr. ex fidem in alia manu A
<app>
<lem>insidias</lem>
<rdg wit="#N" type="correction-substitution">
<subst hand="#N1">
<del>insidia</del>
<add>insidias</add>
<subst>
</rdg>
</app>
insidias] corr. ex insidia alia manu N
insidias] corr. ex insidia N¹
A correction-transposition is a special kind of correction-substitution and should follow the same rules and basic encoding pattern of a correction-substitution. The designation correction-transposition only serves to further specify the kind of substitution taking place.
correction-substitution.del element within the rdg/subst element MAY take seg elements with @n attributes indicating the boundaries of the transposed words or phrases. This is necessary for proper processing when the add element contains more than two words.
@n indicates the relative order of the segments after the transposition has taken place.A correction that simply inverts the order of two words.
<app>
<lem>spiritus sanctus</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="correction-transposition">
<subst>
<del>sanctus spiritus</del>
<add>spiritus sanctus</add>
</subst>
</rdg>
</app>
sanctus ante spiritus transp. A
A correction where a word is moved more than a single word.
<app>
<lem>et spiritus sanctus</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="correction-transposition">
<subst>
<del><seg n="2">spiritus sanctus<seg/> <seg n="1">et</seg></del>
<add>et spiritus sanctus</add>
</subst>
</rdg>
</app>
et ante spiritus sanctus transp. A
note: correction-cancellation is a particularly complicated variation type and should be considered very likely to recieve change and alteration in the next release of the guidelines
A cancellation is a correction of a correction. This gives us nine theoretical types (resulting from the combination of correction-addition, correction-deletion, and correction-substitution) following the logic of the corrections described above. Thus a correction of a correction would simply be a correction wrapped in a parent correction. Some of those nine permutations are not materially possible, and thus we support the following 4 types of corrections of corrections :
deletion-of-addition, but the cancellation also adds a new word in the place of the now deleted addition.rdg MUST take @type=<value-of-cancellation-type>.rdg must follow the logic of one of 4 accepted patterns described in the examples below.deletion-of-addition<rdg wit="#A" type="deletion-of-addition">
<del>
<add place="above-line">fides</add>
</del>
</rdg>
deletion-of-deletion<rdg wit="#A" type="deletion-of-deletion">
<del>
<del>fides</del>
</del>
</rdg>
deletion-of-substitution<rdg wit="#A" wit="deletion-of-substitution">
<del>
<subst>
<add>fidem</add>
<del>fides</del>
</subst>
</del>
</rdg>
substitution-of-addition<rdg wit="#A" type="substitution-of-addition">
<subst>
<del>
<add>spes</add>
</del>
<add>fides</add>
</subst>
</rdg>
With both variations and corrections discussed, it is important to pause and acknowledge two conceptual categories that should inform editorial work and the choice of reading type used.
These two categories are:
When a correction is made on the “alternative” stem it becomes difficult to represent this as a simple correction because, with respect to the main line, there is nothing to correct. The very words in need of correction only occur on the alternate stem.
To handle these cases, we allow rdg@type="variation-substance" to include add, del, and subst as children. But only for the present case, i.e. a correction on an “alternative” stem.
<app>
<lem>secum compateretur illud</lem>
<rdg type="variation-substance" wit="#V">
non
<subst>
<del>idem</del>
<add>illud</add>
</subst>
est
</rdg>
</app>
This will only work if the rdg in question represents a single witness (or two witnesses with an identical variation AND correction).
Thus, if there is another witness with an identical rdg but no correction, then this variation needs to be recorded in a separate reading.
In this case, a processor could be expected, to recognize any add, del, or subst element within a variation-substance and automatically produce the kind of note that would otherwise be manually written in a witDetail.
Such a note might look like:
secum compateretur illud] non illud nota illud corr. ex idem V
As discussed below in witDetail, such cases can also continue to be addressed with the use of witDetail. In this case, one would simply ignore the correction in the rdg and then add a note in witDetail. However, since this case is quite common, it is nice to be able to simply add the correction within the rdg and not worry about adding an extra witDetail.
A “correction that varies” is only possible in the correction-addition and correction-substitution cases.
The guidelines above state that a simple correction-addition should look as follows:
<app>
<lem>Filii et</lem>
<rdg type="correction-addition" wit="#V">
<add place="above-line">Filii et</add>
</rdg>
</app>
and it is suggested that this should render as:
Filii et] add. s.l V
But what if the correction was ‘Filium etiam’? Here we have not only a correction, but a “correction that varies.” In such a case, we would expect that correction to be recorded as follows:
<app>
<lem>Filii et</lem>
<rdg type="correction-addition" wit="#V">
<add place="above-line">Filium etiam</add>
</rdg>
</app>
And the processor is expected to render something slightly different, such as:
Filii et] Filium etiam add. s.l V
The difference in rendering is the result of the difference between a simple correction that corrects in agreement with the main stem and correction that offers a variation from the main stem.
In the end, no new requirements are placed on the editor in such a case. An editor should simply follow the rules outlined above for a correction-addition or correction-substitution. However, it is incumbent on the processor to recognize this difference by performing a string comparison on the value of the add and the value of the lem. When the two strings are identical, a simple correction can be assumed. If the strings are not identical, a “correction that varies” is assumed. If a processor does not wish to perform such a comparison, it is suggested that it should default to the rendering for a “correction that varies.”
These types refer to the situation where a (current or previous) editor suggests or introduces an emendation to the text that is not supported by the textual tradition.
Terminologically, one might consider an improvement that is adopted in the text (i.e. it is placed in the lem element) to be an emendation, while an improvement that is merely suggested but not adopted in the text (and therefore put in a rdg element) can be referred to as a conjecture. To maintain a higher degree of flexibility and reduce the amount of necessary types, we adopt the term conjecture in the typology to signify both emendations and conjectures in the more restricted sense.
General rules for conjectures:
@resp MAY be used to indicate an internal editor responsible for suggesting or including the conjecture.@source MAY be used to indicate an external scholar who has suggested the conjecture.Notice that both of these attributes are pointers. If they do not point to an existing xml:id, the string after # will generally be used in processing.
According to the the judgement of the editor, an expression is missing from the transmitted text. Ideas for improvement of the text may then either be added to the edited text itself or indicated in an apparatus note.
Notice this reading type is only relevant if a note in the apparatus is desired or required. If the addition of some material is sufficiently reflected by appropriate symbols in the text (such as
lem or rdg MUST contain @type="conjecture-supplied".lem or rdg element MUST contain a supplied element as its first child.supplied element MUST contain the added text.An emendation is introduced into the edited text. The text is absent from the textual tradition but added by an editor.
Utrum fides semper
<app>
<lem type="conjecture-supplied">
<supplied>sit</supplied>
</lem>
<rdg type="variation-absent" wit="#P #V #L"/>
</app>
acquisita
10 sit ] suppl.
Note: If the reading of the other witnesses had been variation-absent, a processor could render it like so:
10 sit ] suppl., om. PVL
Two scholars have suggested different solutions to the problem, and the solution by the scholar refered to by the @xml:id#John is is adopted in the text.
Utrum fides semper
<app>
<lem type="conjecture-supplied" source="#John">
<supplied>sit</supplied>
</lem>
<rdg type="absent" wit="#P #V #L"/>
<rdg type="conjecture-supplied" source="#James">
<supplied>erit</supplied>
</rdg>
</app>
acquisita
10 sit ] suppl. John, om. PVL, erit suppl. James
The editor suspects that a word is missing from the text, but is not certain enough to add it to the text. This might as well have been another scholar, and in that case, the @source should be indicated.
Utrum fides
<app>
<lem n="fides"/>
<rdg type="conjecture-supplied">
<supplied>semper</supplied>
</rdg>
</app>
sit
10 num semper post fides scribendum?
A word or phrase is transmitted in some or all of the textual tradition, but the editor or another scholar has suspected that it does not belong in the text and suggests that it be removed.
lem or a rdg MUST contain @type="conjecture-removed".lem or rdg element MUST contain a surplus element as its only child.surplus element MUST contain the removed text.Simple example with a unanimous transmission. The editor removes the word from the edited text.
ut
<app>
<lem type="conjecture-removed"><surplus>cum</surplus></lem>
<rdg wit="#A #B #C">cum</rdg>
</app>
dicit Aristoteles
If the printed text reads “ut [cum] dicit Aristoteles”:
10 [cum] ] del., cum in textu ABC
Alternative, if the printed text reads “ut dicit Aristoteles”:
10 cum post ut del., cum in textu ABC
Another scholar has suggested that a word be removed, but it is supported by the textual tradition and the editor chooses to keep it in the text.
ut
<app>
<lem wit="#A #B #C">cum</lem>
<rdg source="#James" type="conjecture-removed"><surplus>cum</surplus></rdg>
</app>
dicit Aristoteles
10 cum ] ABC, del. James
conjecture-correctedParts of all of the textual tradition supports one reading, but an editor or scholar suggests an alternative reading in its place.
lem or a rdg MUST contain @type="conjecture-corrected".lem or rdg element MUST contain a corr element as its only child.corr element MUST contain the corrected text.The tradition is unambiguous, but the editor deems it useless and prints an emendation in the text.
Utrum fides
<app>
<lem type="conjecture-corrected"><corr>sit</corr></lem>
<rdg wit="#P #V #L">servus</rdg>
</app>
acquisita
10 sit ] servus PVL
The note might be more explicit:
10 sit ] scr., servus PVL
The tradition is mixed and the editor has a conjecture that he does not dare put in the edited text, so he chooses the most appropriate of the transmitted readings (in light of his general editorial principles), which is also supported by another scholar.
Utrum fides
<app>
<lem wit="#C" source="#John">semper</lem>
<rdg wit="#A #B">servus</rdg>
<rdg resp="#Ed" type="conjecture-corrected"><corr>sit</corr></rdg>
</app>
acquisita
10 semper ] C John, servus AB, sit conj.
While parallel-segmentation encoding comes with a number of advantages, an editor invariably faces the challenge of overlapping lemmas and XML’s prohibition against cross-nesting elements. Here we offer guidelines of how to handles such cases.
apps MUST have an @xml:id.app MUST contain a @next pointing to the next connected app element.app MUST contain a @prev pointing to the previous connected app.app that is neither first nor last MUST contain a @next and a @prev element indicating its position in the list.In this complex example, we imagine an omission in witness A that begins with the last word of paragraph 1 and continues into paragraph 2. But the last word of paragraph 1 is also the lemma for a variant between witness B and C.
<p xml:id="paragraph1">lorum
<app xml:id="app1" next="#app2">
<lem>
<app>
<lem wit="#C">ipsum</lem>
<rdg wit="#B">ipsam</rdg>
</app>
</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-absent" cause="homeoteleuton"/>
</app>
</p>
<p xml:id="paragraph2">
<app xml:id="app2" prev="#app1">
<lem>this is the text</lem>
<rdg wit="#A" type="variation-absent" cause="homeoteleuton"/>
</app>
of the second paragraph. The first part of which continues the homeoteleuton started in the previous paragraph
</p>
A processor is expected to handle the above example as follows.
Whenever an app is encountered with a @next attribute, the processor should begin looping through each connected app until it reaches an app that no longer has a @next attribute but only a @prev attribute. Throughout this loop it should concatenate the lem from each app and then concatenate the available readings, matching rdg by the value of the @wit attribute. (In complicated cases, it is advisable to give each witness a separate rdg to make the connection of rdg elements as easy as possible.) Once having looped through all connected apps. The processor should ignore all subsequent apps that have an @prev attribute because these have presumably been dealt with in the previous loop.
A processor can also choose to create this loop in the opposite direction, first ignoring all apps with a @next attribute until it comes to an app that only has a @prev attribute. It can then loop up to each connected app until it reaches an app without a @prev attribute.
Sometimes it is desirable to connect readings even if an editor is not trying to avoid overlapping lemmas. The most likely scenario for this is when it is ideal for an app with a lemma and a second app with a blank lemma to be rendered together. Despite the different motivation, this should be handled in the same way as the method used to deal with overlapping lemmas.
<app xml:id="app1" next="#app2">
<lem>ars</lem>
<rdg wit="#E" next="#app2">ars artium</rdg>
<rdg wit="#Y #H" type="variation-present">ars artium et scientia scientiarum</rdg>
</app>
<app xml:id="app2" prev="#app1">
<lem n="ars"/>
<rdg wit="#E" type="correction-addition">
<add place="above-line" hand="#E1">et scientia scientiarum</add>
</rdg>
</app>
This could render as:
10 ars] ars artium E + et scientia scientiarum add. interl. E1 ars artium et scientia scientiarum YH
non
<app xml:id="app1" next="#app2">
<lem n="non"/>
<rdg wit="#E" type="variation-present">ars</rdg>
<rdg wit="#Y #H" type="variation-present">ars artium</rdg>
</app>
<app xml:id="app2" prev="#app1">
<rdg wit="#E" type="correction-addition">
<add place="above-line" hand="#E1">artium</add>
<rdg>
</app>
This could be rendered as:
10 non] ars in textu E + artium add. interl. E1 ars artium in textu YH
Because we recognize there may be cases where an editor feels that a reading is so unique that it fits into no existing typology, we support the use of a rdg@type="manual", despite highly discouraging its use.
The use of the manual type should be avoided at all costs, and in subsequent versions of the lbp-schema we aim to identify all instances of manual and either explain how these cases fit into the existing typology or expand the typology to encompass this instance.
rdg must have an @type="manual.rdg should include precisely what the editors hope will appear after the lemmadesc elementwit element.Note: for both of the examples below, there are appropriate type categorizes for these rdg types, and thus there is no need for a manual override here. These are provided just for the sake of example.
<app>
<lem>fides</lem>
<rdg wit="#V" type="manual">
fides <desc>corr. interl. ex</desc> fide <wit>V</wit>
</rdg>
</app>
This would likely be rendered as:
10 fides] fides corr. interl. ex fide V
<app>
<lem>fides</lem>
<rdg wit="#V" type="manual">
<desc>om.</desc> <wit>V</wit>
</rdg>
</app>
This would likely be rendered as:
10 fides] om. V
Under normal circumstances the processor will generate, from the above described rdg types, text describing the particular reading. But a reading might represent a certain situation that the editor would like to describe, but is not handled by the processor. In that case the witDetail is handy (and preferred over resorting to the use of rdg@type="manual"), as its content should be added by the processor after the standard text of the reading type, but before the witness siglum.
witDetail MAY take as children only text nodes and the mentioned element.witDetail should be wrapped in a mentioned element.witDetail MUST have an @wit that points to the reading associated with this witDetail.
witDetail information should target only one reading. General notes meant to offer detail or information about the entire apparatus should be included in a note element which should appear at the end of the app.witDetail elements should come immediately after the rdg with which it is associated.witDetail SHOULD include an @xml:lang.witDetail SHOULD NOT be longer than 100 words, since it is expected that this note will be included in a printed apparatus criticus. Longer notes should be included in an app/note.<app>
<lem type="conjecture-correction">quae</lem>
<rdg wit="#V">q</rdg>
<witDetail wit="#V" xml:lang="la">cum 3 litteris rasibus</witDetail>
</app>
A processor could render this as follows:
quae ] conj., q cum 3 litteris rasibus V
The note element used within the app is the appropriate place for an extended prose discussion of the apparatus entry as a whole. Generally, a traditional print rendering of the apparatus does not have room for such notes, and it is not expected that such a note would appear directly in the apparatus. More likely, in a print rendering, these notes would appear in an appendix. Digital representations can offer alternative ways of displaying these notes. For example, see http://lombardpress.org/conceiving-the-digital-critical-apparatus/.
note SHOULD be placed in the last position within the app entry, after all other rdgs and witDetail.note SHOULD include an @xml:lang attribute.note MUST include either text nodes or ab elements as direct children.note, in order to segment the text into 2 or more conceptual parts, the ab element MUST be used.note MAY NOT include p or div elements within it descendant nodes.<app>
<lem>quae</lem>
<rdg wit="#V">qod</rdg>
<note xml:lang="la">
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod
tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim
veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea
commodo consequat.
</note>
</app>
```xml
Or
```xml
<app>
<lem>quae</lem>
<rdg wit="#V">qod</rdg>
<note xml:lang="la">
<ab>
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod
tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim
veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea
commodo consequat.
</ab>
<ab>
Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum
dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non
proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
<ab>
</note>
</app>
Any entry to the apparatus fontium is created with the <cit> element.
<ref> encodes the reference made by the original author. <quote> encodes the original quotation. <bibl> is reserved for the modern editor’s attempt to encode a modern reference identification for the quotation. <bibl> is only allowed inside a <cit> wrapper. <bibl> should only contain one reference, as it is considered the reference object for the <cit> entry. <note> tag can be used for writing explanatory notes for the apparatus.
In this way, the following scenarios are fairly simple to encode:
In the following sections, examples of those scenarios are given.
cit MUST contain either a quote or ref.cit MAY contain a bibl element.cit MAY contain a note element.bibl MUST contain a reference to exactly one bibliographical object.A cit element with a ref and the reference in a bibl element:
Pater per
<cit>
<ref><name>Augustinum<name> in libro X <title>de Civitate</title></ref>
<bibl><author>Augustinus</author>, <title>De civitate Dei</title>, X, c. 1 (PL XX:XX)</bibl>
</cit>
A cit element that has a quote as well as a bibl and note:
<cit>
<quote>In the beginning God created a world</quote>
<bibl>Genesis 1:1</bibl>
<note>This reference to <title>Genesis</title> is ...</note>
</cit>
A quote, following the TEI guidelines, is intended to identify anything that is considered a quotation of another source or text. The value of quotation is most often rendered within quotation marks, i.e. “This is a quote”.
quote MAY stand alone, i.e. it MAY not be a child of a cit element. In such a case it is generally expected that it would not appear in the apparatus fontium.quote MAY be the immediate child of a cit element. In such a case, the quote is expected to appear in the apparatus fontium.quote MAY contain seg elements.
@next and @prev attributes. See the examples below.quote MAY take an @type attribute, the values of which can be:
@type)quote MAY take an @ana attribute, used to indicate a canonical reference for the quote.The following example will not generate an apparatus fontium entry:
<quote>In principio</quote> etc.
The following example will generate an apparatus fontium entry
<cit>
<quote xml:id="quote1" ana="#gen1_1">In principio creavit Deus caelum</quote>
<note>I can't find this.</note>
</cit>
A cit element with just a quote tag, but where the quote consists of two quote segments and an inquit:
<cit>
<quote>
<seg type="qs">lorum</seg>, <!-- Is @type="qs" the best way to do this? -->
inquit,
<seg type="qs">ipsum</seg>
</quote>
<bibl>Sample text</bibl>
<cit>
The following is another, equivalent way, of doing the same thing:
<cit>
<quote xml:id="quote-part-1" next="#quote-part-2" ana="#gen1_1" n="1">
In principio creavit Deus caelum
</quote>
<bibl>Genesis 1_1</bibl>
</cit>
scilicet angelicam naturam, sed adhuc informem, ut quibusdam placet:
<quote xml:id="quote-part-2" prev="#quote-part-1" n="2">
et terram
</quote>
A reference, following the TEI guidelines, is intended to identify anything that is considered a reference to another source.
ref MAY stand alone, i.e. it MAY not be a child of an cit element and thus not appear in the apparatus fontium.ref MAY be the immediate child of a cit element and thus appear in the apparatus fontium.ref MAY contain an @ana attribute, used to indicate a canonical reference for the reference.ref MAY contain a title, name, and num element.ref MAY contain a seg with @type="incipit" for references that include an incipit for the referenced section.The following example is not expected to generate an apparatus fontium:
<ref corresp="#quote-id">
<name>Ockham</name> dicit in prologo
</ref>
The following example is expected to generate an apparatus fontium entry:
<cit>
<ref xml:id="ref1" ana="#gen1_1">
<title ref="#gen">Genesis</title>
1:1
</ref>
<bibl>Genesis 1:1</bibl>
</cit>
The <note> element is available for cases where the editor finds it necessary to give a prose discussion of the passage or sources. A limited set of inline elements are available for markup of the text. They can be used to give bibliographical references (bibl), quotes from the sources (quote), refer to words in the established text (mentioned) and references to other parts of the established text (ref). The ab can be used for separating the text into paragraph-like blocks.
note SHOULD be placed in the last position within the cit entry.note SHOULD include an @xml:lang attribute.note MUST include either text nodes or ab elements as direct children.note MAY include the following elements: bibl, quote, mentioned, ref.note MAY NOT include p or div elements within it descendant nodes.Here is a simple examples with a short note:
<cit>
<quote xml:id="quote1" ana="#gen1_1">In principio creavit Deus caelum</quote>
<note xml:lang="en">I can't find this.</note>
</cit>
A more complex example where most of the allowed elements are used could look like this:
sic, cum <name ref="#Aristotle">Philosophus</name> ponit
<cit>
<quote type="paraphrase">
species abstractas a phantasmatibus intelligibiles
</quote>
<note xml:lang="en">
<ab>
This is probably based on <bibl><title ref="#Arist.DA">De anima</title>
III.8 432a8-9</bibl> cf. <bibl><name ref="#Aquinas">Aquinas</name>, <title
ref="#Aquin.SentDA">Sent. de anima</title> lib. 3, cap. 7, p.
236, ll. 72--89</bibl>. See also <bibl><title ref="#Aquin.SentDA">ibid.</title>
lib. 3, cap. 4, p. 218, ll. 8--23 and p. 220, ll. 101--121.</bibl>
</ab>
<ab>
This statement is not reflected directly in the Aristotelian text ...
</ab>
</note>
</cit>
When a text contains both a reference and a quotation, both a ref and a quote are encoded, but often only the ref or the quote should be wrapped in a cit element and not both. In many cases the reference is separated from the quotation by some amount of words which do not belong in the cit element. We recommend citing the quote since we see this as primary. We would then associate the ref with the quote it is related to via the @corresp attribute. An representative example follows:
<p>Patet per
<ref corresp="#quote1">
<name>Augustinum<name> in libro X <title>de Civitate</title>
</ref>
dicit quod:
<cit>
<quote xml:id="quote1" ana="#aug-cd-10_1">lorum ipsum lorum ipsum</quote>
<bibl><author>Augustinus</author>, <title>De civitate Dei</title>, X, c. 1 (PL XX:XX)</bibl>
</cit>
</p>
cb is a milestone element to mark column breaks in a material witness to the edition in question. cb elements are used to indicate the start of a new column.
@ed MUST indicate the source text in which the column break occurs.@n MUST be used indicate the start of the column in question, e.g. “a” or “b”<cb ed="#W" n="a"/>
pb is a milestone element to mark page breaks in a material witness to the edition in question. pb elements are used to indicate the start of a new page.
@ed MUST indicate the source text in which the page break occurs.@n MUST indicate the page or folio number (determined by @type). In the case of type="folio", the side of the folio is delimited by a -.
@type MAY explicitly indicate the type of numbering as either paginated (“page”) or foliated (“folio”). If none is given, @type="folio" is assumed.- is used in the value of @n, folio is assumed.- appears in the value of @n, type page is assumed.Page break in folio format
<pb ed="#W" n="15-v"/>
Page break in paged format
<pb ed="#W" n="15" type="page" />