Ugh though. I thought we were going to be stricter about enforcing field names
to be 'Java identifier'-like characters only. Why encourage/support # in a
field name? -0
Erik
On Mar 4, 2013, at 20:03, hoss...@apache.org wrote:
Author: hossman
Date: Tue Mar 5 01:03:06 2013
New
I was wondering the same thing. This seems like a Bad Thing,
where will this pop out next? Endless problems for no good
purpose IMO.
In schema.xml:
!-- field names should consist of alphanumeric or underscore characters
only and
not start with a digit. This is not currently strictly
Same here, esp. considering # has a special meaning in URLs. Seems better
to avoid.
Otis
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.comwrote:
I was wondering the same thing. This seems like a Bad Thing,
where will this pop out next? Endless problems for no good
