[tei-council] Pure ODDness

Hugh Cayless philomousos at gmail.com
Wed Nov 20 07:47:50 EST 2013


Some questions (not really answers) inline below :-)

On Nov 20, 2013, at 6:27 , Lou Burnard <lou.burnard at retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

> As I proceed with implementing Pure ODD, inevitably a few 
> obscurities/uncertainties surface. Advice from Council members would be 
> much appreciated.
> 
> 1. un-mixed content models
> 
> We decided to represent mixed content by means of an attribute @mixed on 
> the relevant container element (<sequence> or <alternate>). But how do I 
> represent a content model which in RelaxNG would be just plain old 
> rng:text ?
> 
> The choices seem to be
> a) also allow @mixed on <content> and say <content mixed="true"> (even 
> though actually the content isn't mixed at all)
> b) change the name of @mixed to something like @hasText, @allowsText, 
> @textual  and go with option (a)
> c) introduce a model.contentPart element called <pcdata> and say 
> <content><pcdata></content> (or some better name)
> 
> Preferences? Alternatives?

I think I prefer #c, but wouldn’t cal it <pcdata>. <text> is taken, sadly, but maybe <txt>? <textcontent>?
> 
> 2. co-existence
> 
> I think we agreed that the old and the new method of defining content 
> should co-exist at least for the next release. How should that be done?
> 
> a) change the content model of <content> to permit either 
> model.contentPart  or macro.schemaPattern
> b) change macro.schemaPattern to permit either model.contentPart or 
> macro.anyXML
> c) define a new element (howabout <model>) containing model.contentPart 
> ; allow both that and current <content> initially, then deprecate <content>

Forgive the ignorant question, but how would #a work? Is more than one <content> possible? So you’d have maybe <content type="pureODD"> / <content type="RNG">? #c might be cleanest, but after deprecation, you’d end up with an extra element that wasn’t doing anything...
> 
> Now that I've enumerated them, I think I know which options I prefer, 
> but it would be good to see whether anyone agrees.
> 
> -- 
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
> 
> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived



More information about the tei-council mailing list