On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, señior ¿tyrtle? wrote:
> On 7/26/05 11:18 PM, "Peter N. Lundblad" <peter@famlundblad.se> sneezed:
>
> > On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, señior ¿tyrtle? wrote:
> >
> >> The code is currently using an 'xml:endcoding="base64"' attribute (again XML
> >> 1.1?), which I think is fairly known, is it worth using something less
> >> common just because it might be "more readable"?
> >>
> > Excuse my ignorance (honest), but where is xml:encoding defined? I didn't
> > find it in the XML 1.1 spec. That prefix is reserved, so we have to be
> > careful with what we use. An alternative would be "encoding", but if
> > "xml:encoding" is well-defined in some spec it might be OK and even a good
> > thing to use that.
> Your ignorance is also mine...notice the question mark after 1.1.
> I found a couple of posts on xml:encoding being rejected for the 1.0 spec,
> but that it had a good chance of getting in 1.1 (I don't even know if 1.1 is
> final yet).
> I saw it being used in a Perl module and thought it would be foolish to roll
> my own with this. I have no preference either way.
>
Then just use plain "encoding".
Thanks,
//Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jul 27 22:46:49 2005