File last modified Tuesday, 21-Sep-1999 13:41:08 EDT
For other MEC files, see the MEC Index page.
normal stencils get mapped from MED to HB using <grp>.
"v.d." stencils get mapped from MED to HB using <prp>.
"-----" stencils get mapped from MED to HB using <nrpgrp>.
Make list of such stencils in your batch. Add full stencils to the HB file. Add exactly the same stencil, inside grp tags, to the appropriate spot in the map file. Cut and paste the med stencils from the med file into the new grps in the map file.
check (v.d.) exx. to see if legit. If so, change hb; if not, change MED. In many cases, assume that the MED is wrong, especially if the exceptions are very rare.
Same as above.
accept MED stencils as they are.
if MED variation is easily accounted for typographically (e.g., 1389 for 1398, c1398 for ?c1398), change MED.
if MED variation is more difficult to explain, check to see if the exx. are legit. If so, change HB.
IMPORTANT: if MED variation can be explained by some *other* error, e.g., in version number or manuscript, check exx. to see if they are legit. If so, change HB; if not, fix MED. For example, a citation of ?c1425 Chauliac(1) may be an error in the date (should be ?a1425), or it may be an error for ?c1425 Chauliac(2); Lydg.TB quots. with the wrong date may belong to Lydg.TG; etc.
See below, under (6).
pfs will regularize the form so far as that can be done safely. and later consider creating a HB entry for it if there is sufficient information to do so.
leave it alone in the MED. We will later consider creating a HB entry for it if there is sufficient information.
Send word to pfs so he can recast the citation in the MED so as to remove the page ref after the stencil. He will then map it to the HB stencil in a <grp>.
Do nothing for the moment, but later consider adding HB stencil to existing HB entry, then recast MED citations to match.
Stencil is used in MED only in bracketed citations, and is absent from HB.
Though there are not very many of these, we will defer treatment of them and consider adding them later on the grounds that no bibliographic ref in the MED should go unexplained. Leave unmatched now.
Stencil is used in MED in both bracketed and non-bracketed cits, but bracketed cits sometimes have dates not allowed to non-bracketed cits in HB.
Match, add use note to HB indicating that the work is cited from other dates for non-ME quots.
check quot. to see if (a) really from that MS and (b) if MS is really non-preferred for that line. Change HB (if it is really preferred) or map (if it is really non-preferred but accidentally left off MS) as appropriate.
Assume the data is right: map to HB preferred-ms stencil.
Assume the data is right: map to preferred MS HB-stencil.
check to see if really preferred for that passage, and if so, if omission of comp date is legit. If another MS is really preferred, change HB; otherwise map as usual.
do not map these, since they will have to be checked manually. Instead, create, if necessary, med stencils that include the MS info ("(LdMisc 471)") and map THOSE. Then send note to pfs including the new dummy stencils and explaining the situation; he will manually add MS info to the med stencils based on the page ref.
Check if this is really true. Perhaps MED card or book records long list of page refs that we simply neglected to include in favor of passim. Change HB, then do as above, including note to pfs.
If it is true, and if rarely used, check book manually to see which ms was used for which quot.
If it is true, and if commonly used, or cannot determine info from book, need to change HB entry to use double mss in abbrev, as with PConsc. Change map file to match change in HB.
NO, save files at this pre-merged stage, as at earlier stages, and let MED use them if it likes to correct its own use notes.
replace the old date with the new one in the MED w/o changing the USE note (except by qualifying it: "[In A-L] of print MED...").
These should have a the older version tagged as a stencil within the USE note of the hb entry. If they are missing, add stencil tags, add the new stencil to the map file, and attach the relevant <med>'s.
change HB to tag stencil in USE note, add that stencil to the map file, and map.
change date in MED, and modify use note as above, when we can, to tag stencil in the note and to indicate that the obsolete date applies only to the print MED.
If no principle difference can be found, or if there is a wholesale mess (e.g. the "...in Sur.Soc.35" stencils), remove and add MED stencils as necessary to create a coherent situation, list all changes in the use notes to the appropriate entries ("in print MED also quoted with stencils ... and ... ").