On this Page Filed elsewhere

Mistaken use of ADD tags in LETTERs

Source: notes file
Date: 23 Jun 2004
File name: Wp3333
Keywords: ADD, LETTER, extraneous material

Query. Used <ADD> for material in French at the beginning of two letters which seems to be additional material about the letter, rather than part of the letter itself.

Answer. PFS: could this be done rather by embedding a <LETTER> within a <Q><TEXT><BODY><DIV1>? I'm a bit dubious about this use of ADD

Back to Top

Use of ADD tags for typewritten material

Source: notes file
Date: 24 Jun 2004
File name: S21182
Keywords: ADD, interpolation

Query. The title page is a later typewritten copy, but I have left the data in as there is no other title page and the information is useful.

Answer. PFS: I added <ADD> tags around it to indicate that it is a later addition.

Back to Top

ADD with handwritten material

Source: email
Date: 25 Jan 2005
File name: S17567
Vid: 12682
Page ref: 11
Keywords: ADD, handwritten

Query. Someone has supplied what is missing in handwriting for a word or two in nearly every line. Apex have captured nearly all of it. I wonder whether I should go through adding gaps wherever I think a word or letter is actually handwritten. It seems a shame to lose the information, though.

Answer. In the past, we've saved such information and salved our consciences by placing the inserted material within tags (meaning later addition).

Back to Top


Source: email
Date: 16 May 2002
File name: Wp640
Vid: 96080
Page ref: 46

Query. At the end of the document (part of a collection of different types of material on Jesuitism), there is a signature with some additional material after it. The vendor has used ADD for the later material, and I see from the tagging cheat sheet that ADD might be useful for tagging postscripts to letters etc. Is it ok to leave the add tags in this case? Vendor tagged as follows:

<CLOSER><SIGNED>JAMES, Arch-bishop of <HI>Mac$li$</HI>.</SIGNED> <ADD><HI>Bru$$el$</HI>, Printed by <HI>Martin de Bossuyt</HI>$ Printer to the City, in the <HI>Stone-P$r$$t</HI>, at the $ign of S. <HI>$e$er</HI>.</ADD> <DATE>M. DC. LV.</DATE></CLOSER>

However, there is some "closing" material before the signature and the date at the end could probably go inside ADD with everything else, so perhaps the tagging could be:

<CLOSER><DATELINE>Dated at <HI>Brussel$</HI>, <DATE>the 18. of <HI>Febru$ry</HI>, 1955.</DATE></DATELINE> Sig$ed thus; <SIGNED>JAMES, Arch-bishop of <HI>Mac$li$</HI>.</SIGNED> <ADD><HI>Bru$$el$</HI>, Printed by <HI>Martin de Bossuyt</HI>$ Printer to the City, in the <HI>Stone-P$r$$t</HI>, at the $ign of S. <HI>$e$er</HI>.<DATE>M. DC. LV.</DATE></ADD></CLOSER>

Or is this too complicated??

Back to Top