text in sense - do we really want it?

[ttasovac]

In the following example, please note my professionally phrased comments inside <sense>. Currently, we allow free text inside sense.

<sense n="1" xml:id="JDJ.RLS.obduco.1"><lbl>1)</lbl>
    <def xml:lang="sr">повести што на што или против чега</def><pc>:</pc>
    <cit type="example">
        <quote>о. exercitum ad oppidum</quote>
    </cit>; <!--yuck-->
    <cit type="example">
        <quote>о. Curium</quote>
        <pc>,</pc>
        <cit type="translation" xml:lang="sr">
            <quote>поставити Курија као такмаца другим кандидатима</quote>
        </cit>
    </cit>. <!--yuck-->
    <lbl>Отуда</lbl>
    <cit type="example">
        <quote>о. posterum diem</quote>
        <pc>,</pc>
        <cit type="translation">
            <quote>додати и други дан</quote>
        </cit>
    </cit>.<!--yuck-->
</sense>

How do we feel about it? My sense that mixed content should be avoided here. The question is: do we only strongly suggest this in the narrative or do we get rid of free text in sense?

If somebody can come up with examples why we should allow free text in sense, I'd much appreciate it. I can't think of any right now but that doesn't mean there isn't one.

[laurentromary]

This is why we generalized the availability of <pc> and <lbl>. We could change the content model of <sense> to:

<content>
 <alternate minOccurs="0"
  maxOccurs="unbounded">
   <elementRef key="sense"/>
  <classRef key="model.entryPart.top"/>
  <classRef key="model.phrase"/>
  <classRef key="model.global"/>
 </alternate>
</content>

[ttasovac]

Cool. Will implement later today.

[ttasovac]

Closing this because it's been implemented.