- From: John Stracke <francis@ecal.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 11:47:22 -0500
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
- CC: dav-dev@lyra.org
Greg Stein wrote: > The other possibility is that I'm mistaken in assuming that & is the > correct substitution for an ampersand in an <href> element. I could see an > argument being made that the URL should be encoded using %26 for the > ampersand. That sounds worth a try, at least, since HTTP URLs generally don't have & in the filename part of the URL. Using the & encoding means that it'll be protected from the XML parser, but then the application will see an & in the filename. -- /=================================================================\ |John Stracke | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own. | |Chief Scientist |================================================| |eCal Corp. |I'm not imaginary. I'm ontologically challenged.| |francis@ecal.com| | \=================================================================/
Received on Monday, 12 February 2001 11:41:41 UTC