Re: property names (was: Re: grumble, grumble)
> Urg. -1 on binary property names.
I don't think it's important to support binary property names either.
But I still disagree with you on using URIs:
> Can somebody give a rational reason for not using URIs for prop
I think it's a heavyweight solution to a fairly small problem. We
don't use URIs for our C function names, for instance; we assume the
"svn_" prefix will be good enough. Property names do get presented to
the user (they don't have to be presented to the user exactly as
stored, but what is presented to the user needs to be just as unique
as what is stored), and presenting a URI is both confusing and
obfuscating--confusing because the user might think the URI would mean
something to a web browser, and obfuscating because there's a lot of
crud in there besides the interesting part of the property name.
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:17 2006
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev