Mark Benedetto King <mbk@lowlatency.com> writes:
> Right, as long as fuzzy_escape() it is assumed to be lossy, since
> we're always going to use unescape_xml() on the receiver-side.
>
> Considering, then, that the receiver is capable of unescaping with
> a single function, why isn't the transmitter capable of the same?
>
> It sounds to me that we just have a lossy encoding, and dressing it
> up with is_valid_utf8() and svn_xml_is_xml_safe() just obscures that
> fact. The lossy encoding would just not be lossy if both of those
> conditions were met. Or maybe I misunderstand what fuzzy_escape()
> does. Does it incorrectly handle valid utf8, valid xml characters?
I think your logic is sound, and we should just implement it that way.
However, I had to take this route to that fact to fully grok it.
Sorry if it seemed a bit roundabout to you :-).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Dec 2 18:45:27 2004