- --Piotras wrote on 2006-03-07 13:29:
>> > I am still against having different separators depending on context. Reasons
>> > have been elaborated in detail. The short version: API consistency and Ease of Use.
> OK, I do not say -1 or +1. I just think that it brings ( and will ) some limitations
> to property names. Once we can support one separator we must forbid property
> name like 'attachment'.
I would have no problems with that (it should just be documented ;-)).
Another idea that just came me, what about prefixing restricted names with an
I'm not really sure if this is better then having a : vs . distinction though.
If I had to choose, I'd stick with the reserved property names instead of this
alternative. Just wanted to mention it.