line 9: εἰς → εἰ<ς> based on digital image (Michigan APIS): only one sigma is present after ει, the initial sigma of σποράν
line 15: φακ[οῦ] → φακο(ῦ) based on digital image: suprascript omicron is present
line 27: χώματα → χόματα (l. χώματα) based on digital image


 - line 9: εἰς → εἰ<ς> based on digital image (Michigan APIS): only one sigma is present after ει, the initial sigma of σποράν
line 15: φακ[οῦ] → φακο(ῦ) based on digital image: suprascript omicron is present
line 27: χώματα → χόματα (l. χώματα) based on digital image
 - resubmission (proposal in line 27 withdrawn)
line 9: εἰς → εἰ<ς>
line 15: φακ[οῦ] → φακο(ῦ)

Signed-off-by: Joshua D. Sosin <joshuad.sosin@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: James Cowey <james.cowey@urz.uni-heidelberg.de>
Signed-off-by: Rodney Ast <simoeis@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul Heilporn <paul.heilporn@unistra.fr>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Kruse <thomas.kruse@oeaw.ac.at>
Signed-off-by: Cisca Hoogendijk <ciscahoogendijk@live.nl>
Signed-off-by: Graham Claytor <gclaytor@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mark Depauw <mark.depauw@arts.kuleuven.be>
Signed-off-by: Lajos Berkes <berkes.lajos@googlemail.com>
Signed-off-by: Georg Schmelz <georg.schmelz@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Alain Delattre <adelattr@ulb.ac.be>
Signed-off-by: Jenny Cromwell <jenniferacromwell@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Tonia Sarri <toniasarri@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Christian-Jürgen Gruber <morunculus@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Hélène Cuvigny <h.cuvigny@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: W. Graham Claytor <gclaytor@umich.edu>
Signed-off-by: Arthur Verhoogt <verhoogt@umich.edu>
Signed-off-by: Esther Garel <esthergarel@gmail.com>
Update revisionDesc

 - Vote - AcceptText - Accept. The readings at 9 and 15 seem unambiguous and right to me. On 27 I am less certain. Next voter. Please review my comments and consider returning straight to Zellmann-Rohrer so that he may decide what to do. Lin9: I agree, papyrus has εισποραν; I cannot tell for sure (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/a/apis/X-3022/691R_A.TIF?chaperone=S-APIS-X-3022+691R.TIF;subview=detail;view=entry), but it looks like the iota was written over a previously erased character. Lin15 omicron above the kappa is perfectly clear; it is open at top like the omicron in το one line down and a few letters to the left (also θησ̣αυρο(ῦ) in lin22, καθαρὸ(ν) in lin25). About lin27 χόματα (l. χώματα), I am less certain. What Zellmann-Rohrer reads as omicron (and it is no different from the open omicrons mentioned above in lin15,16,22,25) is identical to what the ed treats as omega in (μισθώ(σεως)) at lin18. So, could either one be one-hooped omega, or should lin18 have μισθό(σεως) => μισθώ(σεως) ? (Joshua D. Sosin)
 - Vote - Return-Straight-to-Sender - Per Sosin's suggestion, this is being sent back to Zellmann-Rohrer.  Corrections in lines 9 and 15 are fine, although the cancellation at the beginning of line 9 should perhaps be flagged (corrections occur throughout the text, e.g., in ln 1 zeta appears to have been written over something, γρ?).  If we are going to accept the suggestion for ln 27, then ln 18 should be altered accordingly.  I agree that paleographically the purported omegas rather resemble omicrons--probably can never know though if the writer intended single-hooped omegas, as Sosin suggests.  Note: in line 13 the papyrus should read τῇ (l. τῆς).  The writer didn't raise his eta to indicate the abbreviation, as he does in line 18. (Rodney Ast)
 - Vote - Accept-Straight-to-Finalization - Accept. Finalizer, please read comments of Ast and Sosin carefully. (Joshua D. Sosin)
 - Finalized - Ready. Ast and Sosin observed several minor improvements (unobserved scribal corrections and one orthographic normalization). I decided not to enter these here. Their observations are recorded in the revision description (in the XML) for posterity. But it seemed better to leave it to someone else to go through and tidy this text up in full. (Joshua D. Sosin)