Message196488
> Is that you actual use case? That you *want* to store binary data in XML, instead of getting it properly rejected as non well-formed content?
No, Stefan.
What I was saying in my last message was just "you're right, the user shall always use repr() when printing an xml tree" (msg196313) because "xml does *not* guarantee to have only printable chars by itself" (msg196368, msg196379).
As an advice I hope you do not take as insult, saying
"in section {section} the spec says {argument}"
is much more constructive than
"read the spec on that", "{extremely_obvious_link}",
at least to people not familiar with the spec and asking for the source of your arguments (msg196360). Can shorten threads, too. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2013-08-29 20:31:04 | maker | set | recipients:
+ maker, mmokrejs, scoder, christian.heimes, r.david.murray, eli.bendersky, serhiy.storchaka |
2013-08-29 20:31:03 | maker | set | messageid: <1377808263.99.0.458832930439.issue18850@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2013-08-29 20:31:03 | maker | link | issue18850 messages |
2013-08-29 20:31:03 | maker | create | |
|