But isn't the advantage of raw over jpeg simply the fact that a raw
image has a higher bit depth and is not lossy compressed?
No. Bits don't always represent the same thing. In raw image files bits represent monochrome luminance values. In classic 16-bit RGB TIFFs the bits represent a color channel value for the Red, Blue, or Green channel in 65,536 very small steps. In an 8-bit JPEGs the bits represent color channel values in RGB in only 256 much coarser steps. But in both cases the raw image information has already been demosaiced/de-Bayered and probably had curves (which simulate the logarithmic human response to light of increasing intensity) applied to convert the gray scale raw information into three discrete values for each of the three color channels.
Other than demosaicing...
Since it's irreversible, demosaicing is a pretty big deal.
Even though digital imaging sensors typically have a color filter array (CFA) in front of them, the colors used on the filter arrays do not correspond to the same colors emitted by our RGB display devices. Nor are they the same colors as those used in CMYK printing. And contrary to all of the descriptions all over the internet, the "red" filters do not block "all" green and blue light, nor does the "green" filter block "all" red and blue light, nor does the "blue" filter block "all" green and red light. Some of each gets through all of them, just as some of each are registered by our short, medium, and long wavelength retinal cones.
It's this overlapping response to different wavelengths that gives our brain the ability to create the perception of color out of the information our retinal cones collect. Color is a product of perception. There is no intrinsic color for any wavelength of electromagnetic radiation. Dogs can't see some of the wavelengths we can. Many insects can see wavelengths we can't. What "color" are the wavelengths bees can see that we can't?
How much weight is given to the output of the information from the photosites under each CFA color and how much each RGB channel is what determines white balance (which includes but is not limited to color temperature - there's also a green ←→ magenta axis as well).
Once the white balance has been applied to generate the RGB values for each pixel in an image, it is more or less "cooked in". The more bits each color channel uses, the more leeway there is to alter the color before the image starts to fall apart, but even 16-bit TIFFs do not have the flexibility to alter WB that 14-bit raw files do.
... what things can no longer be changed by editing a 16 bit TIFF that could still be changed (without similar quality loss) by editing the raw file for the same image?
Black point and white point determine what is the darkest value below which everything will be rendered "0" or pure black and what is the brightest value above which everything will be rendered at full saturation (i.e. 255 in 8-bits, 65535 in 16-bits). These, too, are cooked in when raw information is converted to a typical 16-bit RGB TIFF image.
