Learn how easy it is to sync an existing GitHub or Google Code repo to a SourceForge project! See Demo

Close

#532 <listBibl> isn't allowed as a child of <back>

GREEN
closed-fixed
5
2013-04-13
2013-02-21
Olaf Berg
No

The Element <listBibl> is not allowed as child of <back>. This enforces to wrap it with a <div> or something else in the backmatter. That makes no sense to me.

Discussion

  • Martin Holmes
    Martin Holmes
    2013-02-21

    The same is true of <p> and lots of other sub-div-level tags. Surely it's normal to wrap a list in a <div>?

     
  • I agree with with Olaf. why does <back> not behave the same as <body> in this respect? why should he wrap a <listBibl> in a TEI <div>, when its the only thing in <back>?

     
  • Olaf Berg
    Olaf Berg
    2013-02-21

    In difference to <p> the <listBibl> element is itsef a container for e.g. <bibl> elements. But shurely it is not a big deal to have <div> around it.

     
  • Martin Holmes
    Martin Holmes
    2013-02-21

    Sebastian, are you arguing that the content models for <front> and <back> should be parallel with that of <body>? (I'm not disagreeing, just asking).

     
  • yes, I am. see my other ticket asking for <salute> in <front>, vel sim.

    I know its not easy, technically (see the content models) but it should be our target

     
  • Martin Holmes
    Martin Holmes
    2013-02-21

    I was thinking there would be severe ructions when you propose allowing <titlePage> in <body> and <back>. But having looked at it, I'm now very puzzled by the content model of <back>, which appears to contain model.frontPart, which does have <titlePage>. Am I losing my mind?

    http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-back.html

     
  • No, it is intentional that <titlePage> be allowed in <back>. Some books do that, soz. "The content model of back matter is identical to that of front matter, reflecting the facts of cultural history.", says the <note>

    this needs some face to face reminiscing, but its hard to see why you can have a <castList> but not a <listBibl> in these things.

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2013-03-31

    Historically the only reason for requiring <div> was to provide a simpler content model, but if we've cracked that one for <body> I see no problem with accepting this proposal: the use case is entirely plausible and also helps remind us that a solitary <div> with no siblings should be regarded as an aberation. Going green on that basis.

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2013-03-31

    • milestone: --> GREEN
     
    • assigned_to: Sebastian Rahtz
     
  • model.pLike and model.listLike are now allowed in the start of <back>,w.e.f. the next release

     
    • status: open --> closed-fixed