<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: a small query about quotation marks</title>
	<link>http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Italian_Studies/vhl/archives/2005/01/06/a-small-query-about-quotation-marks/</link>
	<description>going in with a hunch</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 09:45:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.2</generator>

	<item>
 		<title>Comment on a small query about quotation marks by: vika</title>
		<link>http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Italian_Studies/vhl/archives/2005/01/06/a-small-query-about-quotation-marks/#comment-132</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Italian_Studies/vhl/archives/2005/01/06/a-small-query-about-quotation-marks/#comment-132</guid>
					<description>Hunh.  Good eye, Mike.

I'll leave the actual decision to the actual Boccaccio scholars on the team, but my hunch is that since we aren't representing a specific edition &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; are using the electronic text graciously provided by Pietro Beltrami and OVI, it's okay to leave this as is.  If the differences are deemed semantically or otherwise important, I would vote for encoding notes into our text instead of changing it to mirror the critical edition.  But I'm certainly no authority on this.

Paragraph 18 is missing?  Eek.  I'll be happy to re-insert it if you want to send it along.

As an aside:  the volumes of &lt;em&gt;Tutte le Opere&lt;/em&gt; containing the &lt;em&gt;Esposizioni&lt;/em&gt; have been marked as missing at the Rock. [Brown's main library].  It was the only copy; it's maddening. Argh.  Perhaps I should ask them to re-acquire the work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Hunh.  Good eye, Mike.</p>
	<p>I&#8217;ll leave the actual decision to the actual Boccaccio scholars on the team, but my hunch is that since we aren&#8217;t representing a specific edition <em>and</em> are using the electronic text graciously provided by Pietro Beltrami and OVI, it&#8217;s okay to leave this as is.  If the differences are deemed semantically or otherwise important, I would vote for encoding notes into our text instead of changing it to mirror the critical edition.  But I&#8217;m certainly no authority on this.</p>
	<p>Paragraph 18 is missing?  Eek.  I&#8217;ll be happy to re-insert it if you want to send it along.</p>
	<p>As an aside:  the volumes of <em>Tutte le Opere</em> containing the <em>Esposizioni</em> have been marked as missing at the Rock. [Brown&#8217;s main library].  It was the only copy; it&#8217;s maddening. Argh.  Perhaps I should ask them to re-acquire the work.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
