expand content model of figure to allow more components

[raffazizzi]

Currently <figure> has model.divBottom in its content. This allows eg <signed>, but not <byline>, which seems an unnecessary restriction. if we admit this sort of thing, we might as well admit all of it. the TCP EEBO texts have examples of byline inside figure.

we can achieve the right result by changing model.divBottomPart (trailer closer signed postscript) to model.divBottom (meeting byline dateline argument epigraph salute docAuthor docDate trailer closer signed postscript)

Original comment by: sebastianrahtz

[raffazizzi]

whoops, sorry. i mean that the current content model is model.divBottomPart, ie a subset of model.divBottom

Original comment by: sebastianrahtz

[raffazizzi]

what about <postscript>? should that also specify divBotton rather than divBottonPart? should the two classes simply merge?

Original comment by: lb42

[raffazizzi]

oh. thats odd. I wish I could recall why we separated out div.BottomPart. I see <postscript> can contain itself, which is interesting.

resurrecting the whole div{Top,Bottom,Wrapper} debate is now on the cards again, I suppose.

Original comment by: sebastianrahtz

[raffazizzi]

Should this be included in the decisions made by the div.liminal working group? Since that is meant to be looking at the whole problem of things at tops or bottoms of divs and similar elements?

I'm in favour of adding these to figure, the original request, whether that involves merging the existing classes.

I believe it was an attempt to simplify the div content model (ha ha) without getting non-deterministic / ambiguous content models.

-James

Original comment by: jamescummings

[raffazizzi]

I have duly made the change, as it seems pretty harmless, and no-one is speaking against it.

i agree, the div.liminal discussion should be looking at this Bottom vs BottomPart

Original comment by: sebastianrahtz

[raffazizzi]

• status: open --> closed

Original comment by: sebastianrahtz