[tei-council] <content> vs <mixedContent>

[Lou Burnard]

On 03/10/14 16:20, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> On 3 Oct 2014, at 15:29, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard at retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 03/10/14 15:18, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>>> No, really, folks this is mad.
>>>
>>> Having two elements <content> and <mixedContent> which have more or less
>>> identical semantics, and identical content models,
>> They don't have identical content models.
>> <mixedContent> cannot have <alternate> or <sequence>
> what??????  you’re dreaming. of course it has alternate and sequence, those
> are the basic building blocks of the content model.
>
> unless you’re talking about a very different mixedContent from me. my understanding
> is that its sugar for the existing <content allowText=“true”> as we have now. If you’re
> thinking of something else, then all bets are off and I invoke Habeas Corpus.
>


You really were sleeping during the earlier discussion, weren't you!

We invented this element precisely because it has a different content 
model from <content> -- mixed content is always exactly the same as an 
alternation of a bunch of elements with text. So it would be nonsensical 
to permit it to contain sequence, and redundant to permit alternate.