editing stanzas interrupted by dependent prose

[arlogriffiths]

In the NEW version of EGC, we have the section "4.7.2 Stanzas interrupted by dependent prose" outlining a theoretical model for encoding stanzas interrupted by prose glosses. This is now exactly the scenario that I am looking at in PYU 16 (tfc-pyu-epigraphy/DHARMA_INSPYU00016), the inscription published in our 2017 article, where chunks of Sanskrit verse are interspersed with Pyu-language glosses.

Should and could we offer an encoding strategy like the one imagined in EGC, or anything more adequate? My aims are:

1. minimally, to be able to encode what is Sanskrit and what is Pyu in this text
2. if it can be done without great demand of Michaël's time, to be able to offer a logical display that displays the Sanskrit verses as such separated from the Pyu prose
3. even better, to offer such logical display with a mechanism for showing which chunk fo Sanskrit correspond to which chunk of Pyu

The phenomenon is probably extremely rare in our corpus, and so I can continue to live without any puckah encoding at all. But it would certainly be nice if aim 1 could be achieved.

[michaelnmmeyer]

It is far too late to even think about doing this kind of stuff. It is already certain at this stage that I will not have enough time to clean things up properly, so let's not make the situation even worse by introducing new opportunities for bugs to creep in.

[danbalogh]

There's already a similar, although simpler, encoding scheme in the EGD (§2.3.7 and example 2.3.7.B in the Google Doc version), and the schema seems to handle it decently. The example in the EGD is from INSSiddham00026, and if you click on the logical display, the prose gets separated from the verse. There's no indication in the display that it's a continuation of the same stanza, except that they have the same stanza number, so it's sort of implied. I think we could live with this sort of display for the rare cases where prose and verse are interspersed. The EGD encoding, like your EGC one, relies on @part added to the elements (and to if a line is broken), but without @Prev and @next linking. I think it should be unproblematic to add @xml:lang to any of the containers to encode what is Sanskrit and what is Pyu, so your aims 1 and 2 are, I think, already achieved. Linking the parts and figuring out encoding and display for indicating which bit of Sanskrit corresponds to which bit of Pyu sounds overambitious to me.
That said, we will certainly need further schema adjustments in the near future, as I just noted in the other thread too.

[arlogriffiths]

Thanks. A complication of PYU 16 is that the chunks are below the level of <l>. This means that using the same encoding would never yield a display that is recognizable as verse form. But let me start by trying that method.