On Jan 12, 2012, at 12:22 PM, Massimo Di Pierro wrote: > We did this once and had to revert because it broke backward > compatibility. I guess we can try again but the object must derive > type string.
Yeah, or its own class. URI, perhaps.
On Jan 12, 2012, at 12:22 PM, Massimo Di Pierro wrote: > We did this once and had to revert because it broke backward > compatibility. I guess we can try again but the object must derive > type string.
Yeah, or its own class. URI, perhaps.