QUESTION: ban 0x09, 0x0A, 0x0D from 'name' ?

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

Ref:  http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cgmo-webcgm/200509/msg00093.html
Comments:  15
==========

Probably not very controversial, but it is a technical change, strictly 
speaking...

QUESTION:  should WebCGM fragment syntax ban 0x09, 0x0A, 0x0D from the 
'name' production?

DISCUSSION:  3.1.1.3, #3, 2nd bullet says, "shall not contain any leading 
or trailing whitespace (#x09 | #x0a | #x0d | #x20)."  Dieter asks, "Does 
this mean, 0x09, 0x0A or 0x0D are fine in other places [within objname]?"

RECOMMENDATION:  as Dieter suggests, "They should be banned completely from 
a name."

Comments / objections?

Regards,
-Lofton.