On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 02:10:37PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> > Yes, that makes even the capitalized "CON" issues go away. It's not a
> > one-to-one mapping, though ("foo-" and "foo_" map to the same entity).
>
> foo_ would map to foo__, and foo- would map to something else.
> (foo- as we do not rewrite dashes, yet?)
Ah, OK, I took your:
> [A-Z] -> _[a-z]
to mean "A-Z becomes a-z, and everything else becomes underscore".
If you mean a real one-to-one mapping that allows a-z and only a few
safe metacharacters, then yeah, that's what I was thinking, too.
> > If we want that, too, I think something like url-encoding is fine, with
> > the caveat that we simply urlencode _more_ things (i.e., anything not in
> > [a-z_]).
>
> Yeah I think we need more than url encoding now.
If you take "url encoding" to only be the mechanical transformation of
quoting, not the set of _what_ gets quoting, we can still stick with it.
We don't need to, but it's probably no worse than inventing our own
set of quoting rules.
-Peff
