Roland Melkert Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So
> are we allowing the full unicode set and let the
> software/os handle wrong names or do we define the
> bad ones somewhere in full?
>
> The current 1.0.0 only mentions a couple of 'bad'
> characters (it doesn't list : and * for example).
> So maybe add a full list based on e.g. fat32,
> ext2, ntfs (and other major fs's).
Since I'm not a programer it is not my sandbox but I'd go with a set that is supported by the largest number of FS.
w.
-------------------------------------------------------
> So
> are we allowing the full unicode set and let the
> software/os handle wrong names or do we define the
> bad ones somewhere in full?
>
> The current 1.0.0 only mentions a couple of 'bad'
> characters (it doesn't list : and * for example).
> So maybe add a full list based on e.g. fat32,
> ext2, ntfs (and other major fs's).
Since I'm not a programer it is not my sandbox but I'd go with a set that is supported by the largest number of FS.
w.
LEGO ergo sum