Robin Cover wrote:

> does anyone know of a term used to describe the case where
> we mean (in XML) "PCDATA optionally mixed with elements in
> the document insance" rather than what the XML spec defines
> "mixed content" ("Mixed") to be, which includes both
> (a) and (b)
> (a) <!ELEMENT foo (#PCDATA) >
> (b) <!ELEMENT foo (#PCDATA | bar)* >
> Generally, when people have questions about "mixed content"
> (models) they mean "(b)", but in SGML/XML, 'mixed' means
> both.  Does anyone ever say "really mixed" when they mean
> "(b)"?

I know that it's not strictly correct, but like you I find the terminology slightly
misleading, so for the following:

(a) <!ELEMENT foo (#PCDATA) >
(b) <!ELEMENT foo (#PCDATA | bar)* >
(c) <!ELEMENT foo (bar) >

I'm in the habit of using "data content" for (a), "mixed content" for (b) and "element
content" for (c).


Marcus Carr                      email:  [log in to unmask]
Allette Systems (Australia)      www:
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
       - Einstein