Marc-Andre Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> added the comment: Stefan Behnel wrote: > > 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.
There's always the possibility of adding a new official codec called 'unicode' which converts Unicode to Unicode as no-op. This may also be useful to have in other situations where you want to signal a special case for Unicode input or output. ---------- nosy: +lemburg _______________________________________ 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
