• From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• To: Alex Muir <alex.g.muir@g...>
• Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 14:59:41 -0500

Alex Muir scripsit:

> Probably the only consistent selection across all tools would be for
> CamelCase.. underscore and minus would give different results across
> different tools.

Any tool that purports to support XML as such (as opposed to being a general
text editor) and doesn't know the rules for XML names, is either misconfigured
or buggy.

-- 
Let's face it: software is crap. Feature-laden and bloated, written under
tremendous time-pressure, often by incapable coders, using dangerous
languages and inadequate tools, trying to connect to heaps of broken or
obsolete protocols, implemented equally insufficiently, running on
unpredictable hardware -- we are all more than used to brokenness.
                   --Felix Winkelmann

• References:
  • Re: Should one adopt the tag naming convention of anexisting XML vocabulary or create one's own tag naming convention?
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche@o...>
  • RE: Should one adopt the tag naming convention of an existing XML vocabulary or create one's own tag naming convention?
    • From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@h...>
  • Re: Should one adopt the tag naming convention of anexisting XML vocabulary or create one's own tag naming convention?
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche@o...>
  • Re: Should one adopt the tag naming convention of anexisting XML vocabulary or create one's own tag naming convention?
    • From: Alex Muir <alex.g.muir@g...>