Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main


b. 273

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

..

The cautionary flat before bis present in A (→GE), yet it was overlooked in FE (already at the stage of the text's planning – no place for the sign was provided). It was readded in EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Cautionary accidentals

b. 273

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

No mark in sources

Long accent suggested by the editors

..

According to us, the absence of the accent over the gminim may be considered an inaccuracy of Chopin's notation. Both the accent in analogous bar 265 and the one suggested here form part of the elements co-creating the air of the virtuoso brilliance of these passages.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 273-277

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III

Slurs from f​​​​​​​2 in FE (→GE,EE)

Slurs from g​​​​​​​2 – our alternative suggestion

..

The slurs in the 1st halves of bars 273 and 277 may be considered inaccurate – see the note to bar 30. However, we preserve the source slurs in the main text, since when the main theme of this movement returns, they consistently appear in all three appearances of this motif (the discussed bars and bar 281). 

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 273-274

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

No sign in A (→FEEE)

in FC (→GE)

..

In the main text we give the  hairpin entered by Chopin into FC (→GE). There is a similar situation in all analogous bars, i.e. b. 294-295, 375-376 & 396-397.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 273-274

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

E & g tied in AGE2 (→GE3) & FESf

E repeated in FC (→GE1)

g repeated in FE (→EE)

..

The omitted ties in FE (→EE) and FC (→GE1) must be mistakes. The tie of E was added in GE2 (→GE3), most probably on the basis of comparison with the analogous places. A tie next to g was added only just in FESf.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Errors of FC , Annotations in FESf