no, my point is it's not a photo, it's the hash of the photo. 
confusing if you just read the xml without reading the comments too.

On 10/18/05, Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Norman Rasmussen wrote:
> > Apologies, perhaps it should have been called photohash instead, to
> > avoid confusion?
>
> Isn't that what namespaces are for? ;-)
>
> Peter
>
>
>
>
>


--
- Norman Rasmussen
 - Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 - Home page: http://norman.rasmussen.co.za/

Reply via email to