opened from #1696: There is content on 162r that are in divs with no ids (these are ignored by manuscript-object). Markup needs to be reviewed here.
We (@tcatapano and @gschare and @njr2128) have identified the larger issue here: it is a content/editorial problem, NOT a coding or a parsing problem. We believe that in order to better align the marginal emphs with their corresponding main text, three divs were introduced so that it was broken up, see: https://github.com/cu-mkp/m-k-manuscript-data/blob/2e720fd443866a21322eb7c395dbfd5232f039a7/ms-xml/tc/tcp162rpreTEI.xml#L30-L63
problem:
because the first div of <div id="p162r_1"> has now been closed in order to open the new divs that separate the emphs, these text blocks are now no longer associated with any entry (and have no div id). However, because they semantically belong to p162r_1, the text of this folio has changed in meaning. We have essentially said that these blocks of text do not belong with any other text and are not distinct entries themselves, which goes against our encoding policies. Normally, these would have "part" attributes.
Downstream consequences other than meaning include entry-metadata extraction and entries-txt and entries-xml (the text inside the unassigned divs is completely omitted).
In order to remedy this, we need to understand why these additional divs are in place and why the "part" attribute is not used. We think it is because of rendering solutions put in place by @thuchacz. Can you confirm, @thuchacz? Otherwise, I will try to add "part" tags and see what happens to the rendering in edition-dev and then consult with PHS.