When the a-p has overwritten letters, there are a variety of ways we have indicated this: 1. editorial comment 2. markup (with <del> and <add>) 3. ed comm and markup It seems to me that the markup leaves the page cleaner, but I realize we may well have decided on something else previously... See also #120 and #217
Can @njr2128 @thuchacz @TillmannTaape @Pantagrueliste please let me know whether you think the policy should be 1, 2, or 3. thanks
Tillmann and I went through this together a few times, and dealt with some case-by-case. When something was really evident and seemed warranted, we used markup (with/without comment using discretion). Other we left without markup or just flagged as problematic. I put this on the second sheet of the tracking sheet to be raised a larger problem that had not been done consistently in the issues for discussion.
Pamela, you and I discussed this as one of the outstanding questions logged in the second tab of the tracking sheet. This is what I have down as your decision then (with some examples of cases):
Indications that letters or words were written over another one? e.g ., c082r02, c088v01, c089v03, c090r01 | | | not consistently done - leave it out. -- | -- | -- | --
Not sure what final decision is / should be