Stefan Behnel <sco...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment: > Supporting unicode for lxml.etree compatibility is fine with me, but I > think it might make sense to support the string "unicode" as well (as > a pseudo-encoding -- it's pretty clear to me that nobody will ever > define a real character encoding with that name :-).
The reason I chose the unicode type over a 'unicode' string name at the time was that I wanted to make a clear distinction to show that this is not just selecting a different codec but that it changes the output type. I don't really care either way, though, given that this reads a lot less well in Py3. If ET supports both, lxml will follow. Stefan ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8047> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
