On Sun, 06 Apr 2003 23:02:24 -0400, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
> I've seen 'in the wild' keywords such as $Label1, $Label2 etc Since I'm in
> the process of adding keyword support and want to have a fixed set of
> 'labels' that a user can define
^^^^ client
I think that my correction is important.
If you want "labels" that a user can defined, that's keywords.
What you are asking about is a set of fixed names which has a different
meaning on a per-client basis.
> I'm interested in knowing whether this is
> something that should be 'standardised' behaviour to promote interop
> between clients.
I certainly hope not. But I'm not going to oppose it either.
I am somewhat perplexed as to how this would be useful; but I don't see
particular harm either.
