bug#20845: 25.0.50; bookmark.el, handling of fictitious `buffer' property

[Noam Postavsky]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

> It should be sufficient to communicate the buffer
> _name_ as the property value.  And that's something
> savable and retrievable - it's useful generally.
>
> IOW, it's OK to have `buffer' bookmark property,
> but I think its value should be a buffer name.

Would that potentially be a problem if the buffer is renamed?