on Thu Sep 22 2011, David Maus <dmaus-AT-ictsoc.de> wrote: >> > The link escaping was changed in November 2010, maybe the link in >> > question is an old one? >> >> Yep. > > Good. This explains it.
I think it's unfortunate that link escaping should have been changed in a backward-incompatible way. Seems like the "right" thing to do would have been to add a fallback to the old interpretation if the new one failed. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
